ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2018
[Pathology and histopathological evaluation of penile cancer].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Clinical Complexity of Penile Cancer: Current Clinical-Epidemiological Data from the Database of the Free State of Saxony/Germany.Urologia internationalis · 2022Article
- [Conventional grading vs. molecular grading : Decision aids for clinical routine].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2021Review
- What you need to know: updates in penile cancer staging.World journal of urology · 2021Review
- The Diagnosis and Treatment of Penile Cancer.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPenile cancer is rare in Germany and in western European countries. Our understanding of the pathogenesis and pathology of this malignancy has increased considerably in recent years.
objectivesClinical management has become more complex, with organ-preserving strategies being increasingly favored. Associated with these developments, the demands on the pathology reports of biopsies and surgical specimens from the penis have also increased. MATERIALS AND
methodsAccording to guidelines and the relevant literature, this review outlines the most important aspects that must be considered in the classification and pathological reporting of penile cancer.
resultsCorrect histological subtyping of penile cancer is important for prognostic and therapeutic considerations. There are also some peculiarities with the current TNM classification system of this tumor compared to other entities.
conclusionHandling of specimens and histopathological typing must be performed by experienced pathologists according to recent developments in the pathogenesis, classification, and therapeutic strategies of penile cancer.
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.