Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27785420›Full record

ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2016

Why are upper tract urothelial carcinoma two different diseases?

Tibor Szarvas, Orsolya Módos, András Horváth, Péter Nyirády

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Regulatory region mutations ofJournal of Cancer · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tibor SzarvasDepartment of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary; ; Department of Urology, University Hospital of Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Orsolya MódosDepartment of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
András HorváthDepartment of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Péter NyirádyDepartment of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the last few years growing evidence highlighted the differences between upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC) which cannot be explained solely by their different anatomical location. The aim of this review was to summarize current progress in UTUC research and to underline the differences and similarities between UTUC and UBC by focusing on epidemiology, etiology, staging and risk factors as well as on surgical and medical management. UBC and UTUC sharing common risk factors such as smoking and aromatic amines, while aristolochic acid exposure or familiar Lynch syndrome are rather specific for UTUC. The grading of UBC and UTUC are identical, but inherent from their different anatomical locations, there are some differences between their stage classifications. As an example, in contrast to UBC where a clear recommendation for pT3 subclassification exists, in UTUC current research aims to define an adequate subclassification for pelvic pT3 cases aiming to provide a better risk stratification. The primary treatment for both UBC and UTUC is surgery. Similarly to UBC, UTUC patients at high risk of disease progression are treated by radical surgery. However, because of the inaccurate preoperative or transurethral staging of UTUC, many radical nephroureterectomies are performed unnecessarily. Preoperative prediction of pathological stage or patients' prognosis may reduce this overtreatment by selecting patients for nephron-sparing surgery. To this end, predictive models combining histological and molecular features together with imaging data may be used. The antegrade or retrograde instillation of BCG or mitomycin C, as topical agents is feasible after conservative treatment of UTUC or for the treatment of CIS. However, the prognostic significance of lymph node positivity in UTUC seems to be similar to that of UBC, the therapeutic benefit of lymph node dissection (LND) in UTUC has not been firmly established yet. In addition, the number of lymph nodes to be removed and the sequence of lymphadenectomy also remain to be defined. Systemic neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapies appear to have beneficial effect on UTUC survival, however, this has to be confirmed by large prospective studies. Due to the intensive research of the last few years, our knowledge on UTUC has been largely improved, but many questions remained to be answered. Further research on the molecular background of UTUC holds the potential to identify prognostic or predictive markers which, together with imaging and histologic data, may help to overcome the inaccuracy of ureteroscopic endoscopy and may therefore help to improve therapeutic decision-making. Further, prospective studies should confirm the benefit of LND and adjuvant chemotherapy. Considering the low incidence of UTUC, conduction of such studies is difficult and may only be performed in a multicenter setting.

Indexed as

chemotherapyepidemiologypredictive toolsrisk factorsstagingUpper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC)

Identifiers

PMID27785420
PMCPMC5071198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.