ArticleRadiology2019
Personalized Treatment for Small Renal Tumors: Decision Analysis of Competing Causes of Mortality.
Article in Radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous thermal ablation for renal cell carcinoma: a comprehensive review of current evidence and future directions.La Radiologia medica · 2026Review
- An Evaluation of a Web-Based Decision Aid for Treatment Planning of Small Kidney Tumors: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Clinical outcomes and effect on intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pain of patients undergoing retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Assessment of the effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation as a technique for destroying small renal tumors in patients older than 70.Central European journal of urology · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To compare the effectiveness of personalized treatment for small (≤4 cm) renal tumors versus routine partial nephrectomy (PN), accounting for various competing causes of mortality. Materials and Methods A state-transition microsimulation model was constructed to compare life expectancy of management strategies for small renal tumors by using 1 000 000 simulations in the following ways: routine PN or personalized treatment involving percutaneous ablation for risk factors for worsening chronic kidney disease (CKD), and otherwise PN; biopsy, with triage of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) to PN or ablation depending on risk factors for worsening CKD; active surveillance for growth; and active surveillance when MRI findings are indicative of papillary RCC. Transition probabilities were incorporated from the literature. Effects of parameter variability were assessed in sensitivity analysis. Results In patients of all ages with normal renal function, routine PN yielded the longest life expectancy (eg, 0.67 years in 65-year-old men with nephrometry score [NS] of 4). Otherwise, personalized strategies extended life expectancy versus routine PN: in CKD stages 2 or 3a, moderate or high NS, and no comorbidities, MRI guidance for active surveillance extended life expectancy (eg, 2.60 years for MRI vs PN in CKD 3a, NS 10); and with Charlson comorbidity index of 1 or more, biopsy or active surveillance for growth extended life expectancy (eg, 2.70 years for surveillance for growth in CKD 3a, NS 10). CKD 3b was most effectively managed by using MRI to help predict papillary RCC for surveillance. Conclusion For patients with chronic kidney disease and small renal tumors, personalized treatment selection likely extends life expectancy. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
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.