Observational studyUrology2020
Emulating Target Clinical Trials of Radical Nephrectomy With or Without Lymph Node Dissection for Renal Cell Carcinoma.
Observational study in Urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concordance between target trial emulation and randomised controlled trials: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2026Pooled it
- Reporting of Observational Studies Explicitly Aiming to Emulate Randomized Trials: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Target trial emulation studies in oncology: a comprehensive analysis.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Trastuzumab in early curative breast cancer: A target trial emulation benchmarked against two randomized clinical trials.PLoS medicine · 2025Article
- Implementation of the trial emulation approach in medical research: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- The Current Role of Lymph Node Dissection in Nonmetastatic Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Outcome after resection of occult and non-occult lymph node metastases at the time of nephrectomy.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- 3D-Printed Cold Preservation Device in Renal Autotransplantation for the Treatment of a Patient With Renal Artery Stenosis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- The Role of Lymph Node Dissection for Non-Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Dissecting the role of lymphadenectomy in the management of renal cell carcinoma: past, present, and future.Kidney cancer journal : official journal of the Kidney Cancer Association · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo emulate two target clinical trials of radical nephrectomy (RN) with lymph node dissection (LND) vs radical nephrectomy alone.
methodsUsing the National Cancer Database, we separately emulated an index trial of patients with cT1-3cN0cM0 renal cell carcinoma (RCC), designed to resemble EORTC 30881 ("index trial emulation"), and a hypothetical trial of patients at increased risk for lymph node metastases with cT1-4cN0-1cM0 RCC ("high-risk trial emulation"). A propensity score for LND was estimated using preoperative features (Model 1) or preoperative and pathologic features (Model 2). The associations of LND with overall survival (OS) were estimated using Cox regression with stabilized inverse probability weights.
resultsA total of 67,388 patients were included in the index trial emulation. Median follow-up was 49.2 (interquartile range 27.2-74.3) months. LND was not associated with improved OS when adjusting using either Model 1 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-1.33; P <.0001) or Model 2 (HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.07-1.20; P <.0001). A total of 69,477 patients were included in the high-risk trial emulation. Median follow-up was 48.6 (interquartile range 26.6-73.8) months. LND was not associated with improved OS when adjusting using either Model 1 (HR 1.24; 95% CI 1.18-1.30; P <.0001) or Model 2 (HR 1.09; 95% CI 1.04-1.16; P = .001). In sensitivity analyses, LND was not associated with improved OS across cN stage, pT stage, tumor grade, histologic subtype, or probability of pN1 disease.
conclusionIn observational analyses, that emulate target trials representing EORTC 30881 and a trial of LND in high-risk RCC, LND was not associated with improved OS.
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.