ArticleArab journal of urology2011
Incidental vs symptomatic renal tumours: Survival outcomes.
Article in Arab journal of urology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnosis of Hereditary Leiomyomatosis and Renal Cell Cancer After Subcapsular Renal Hematoma.IJU case reports · 2025Article
- Trends of adult primary malignant renal tumors over 6 years.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurrently there is an increase in the incidental diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Our aim was to assess the survival of patients with incidental and symptomatic renal tumours who had undergone nephrectomy. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively assessed 604 patients who underwent renal surgery for RCC between 1983 and 2005. Patients were divided in two groups; group 1 had incidental and group 2 had symptomatic tumours. The median follow-up was 4 and 3.3 years for groups 1 and 2, respectively. All patients had surgery in the form of radical or partial nephrectomy. Sex, age, tumour size, type of surgery, pathological characteristics and patient survival in both groups were evaluated. The statistical analysis included the log-rank, Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression tests.
resultsThere were 85 patients (14%) in group 1 (mean age 49.6 years) and 519 (86%) in group 2 (mean age 50 years). The mean (SEM, range) tumour size was 7.4 (0.4, 1.5-20) cm in group 1 and 9.7 (0.2, 2-38) cm in group 2 (P < 0.001). The most common stage was T1 (52%) and T2 (44%) in groups 1 and 2, respectively, with a predominance of G2 grade and the conventional type histology in both the groups. There was a significant difference in cancer-specific survival (CSS) between the groups (log-rank, P = 0.017). The 5- and 10-year CSS was 94% and 94% for group 1, and 82.5% and 79.5% for group 2. Cox regression analysis showed that in group 1, only the tumour mid-zonal location (P = 0.093), tumour stage pT (P < 0.001), grade 1 (P = 0.03), grade 2 (P = 0.01), grade 4 (P = 0.01) and the papillary histological type (P = 0.019) had significant effects on CSS. In group 2, only tumour size (P = 0.022) and stage pN (P = 0.003) had significant effects on CSS. The tumour recurrence rate was 18% and 29% for groups 1 and 2, respectively.
conclusionsThis large study supports the findings of other smaller studies published previously, confirming that at presentation incidental renal tumours are smaller and their diagnosis provides a better prognosis and longer CSS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.