Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32076796›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2020

[Why have tyrosine kinase inhibitors failed in the adjuvant situation and do checkpoint inhibitors make more sense?]

Susanne Krege

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    2020
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Susanne KregeKlinik für Urologie, Kinderurologie und urologische Onkologie, Ev. Kliniken Essen Mitte, Huyssens Stiftung, Henricistr. 92, 45136, Essen, Deutschland. s.krege@kem-med.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In view of a considerable risk of recurrence especially in patients with a high-risk profile after organ-sparing surgery or nephrectomy, adjuvant treatment seems to make sense in renal cell carcinoma. After the failed attempts using older immunotherapeutics or vaccination therapies, new hope was put in the panel of targeted VEGF/R inhibitors. But the results from these studies published so far are also disappointing. In this context the instruments for selecting the best suitable patients for adjuvant trials have to be discussed. It remains to be seen whether using the same selection criteria as in ongoing trials with checkpoint inhibitors will show better results.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalCarcinoma, Renal CellChemotherapy, AdjuvantHumansKidney NeoplasmsMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNephrectomyProtein Kinase InhibitorsReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalProtein Kinase InhibitorsReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorAdjuvant therapyNephrectomyRecurrenceRenal cell carcinomaVascular endothelial growth factor

Identifiers

PMID32076796

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.