ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2018
[Penile cancer: diagnosis and staging].
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.
- Article
- The peri- and intratumoral immune cell infiltrate and PD-L1 status in invasive squamous cell carcinomas of the penis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2022Article
- [175 years of anesthesia and narcosis-Towards a "human right to unconsciousness"].Der Anaesthesist · 2021Review
- Human papilloma virus: A review study of epidemiology, carcinogenesis, diagnostic methods, and treatment of all HPV-related cancers.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Review
- Secondary NK/T cell lymphoma after radiotherapy for non-HPV-related squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: an early warning event and literature review.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Penile cancer is often an obvious visual diagnosis but histologic verification should be obtained prior to treatment. The clinical examination should determine the tumor stage and whether it has infiltrated the cavernous bodies and/or the urethra and it should adequately assess the inguinal lymph nodes. Preoperative imaging of the lesion is only indicated in equivocal cases. Curative treatment requires the complete removal of the primary tumor and all metastatic lymph nodes. Lymph node management is the key prognostic factor in the treatment of penile cancer. No imagining technique such as the ultrasound, CT, MRI or PET/CT is able to adequately detect micrometastatic lymph nodes. Therefore, invasive (inguinal) lymph node diagnosis is indicated for all tumour stages from pT1G2. Over 90% of penile cancer cases can be cured with early diagnosis and adequate treatment if routine self-examination and physical examinations are regularly performed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29523915What 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.