SynthesisScientific reports2016
Prognostic role of urinary collecting system invasion in renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recurrence in Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: a Systematic Review of Contemporary Data.Current urology reports · 2017Pooled it
- Urinary Biomarkers in Urological Oncology: From Biological Origin to Clinical Decision-Making-A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Renal Cell Carcinoma Mimicking Transitional Cell Carcinoma: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2021Article
- Prognostic effect of renal collecting system invasion on survival of patients with renal cell carcinoma and tumor thrombus.Central European journal of urology · 2020Article
- Renal cell carcinoma: predicting RUNX3 methylation level and its consequences on survival with CT features.European radiology · 2019Article
- WHO/ISUP classification, grading and pathological staging of renal cell carcinoma: standards and controversies.World journal of urology · 2018Review
- External validation of a nomogram including the computed tomography imaging score to predict indolent renal masses.International urology and nephrology · 2017Article
- R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry Score: A Preoperative Risk Factor Predicting the Fuhrman Grade of Clear-Cell Renal Carcinoma.Journal of Cancer · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relationship between urinary collecting system invasion (UCSI) and oncological outcomes in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients has attracted extensive attention recent years. However, the reports were inconsistent and remain controversial. Thus, we performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant studies up to June 2015 and conducted a standard meta-analysis of survival outcomes. 17 studies containing 9012 RCC patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Pooled HRs for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were 1.45 (95%CI, 1.26-1.66, P < 0.001) and 2.27 (95% CI, 1.54-3.34, P < 0.001), respectively. Further subgroup analysis suggested that UCSI was significant associated with poor cancer-specific survival (CSS) in stage T1-T2 RCC (HR = 2.05, 95%CI: 1.43-2.96, P < 0.001) but not in stage T3-T4 tumors (HR = 1.08, 95%CI: 0.63-1.85, P = 0.771). Current evidence revealed that UCSI has a significant negative impact on OS and RFS in RCC patients and could be used to predict CSS especially in localized RCC. Thus, RCC patients with UCSI should be paid more attention by clinician and pathologist and require close follow up for their poor prognosis.
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.