Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32238473›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN2020

A Simple Clinical Tool for Stratifying Risk of Clinically Significant CKD after Nephrectomy: Development and Multinational Validation.

Robert J Ellis, Sharon J Del Vecchio, Kevin M J Gallagher, Danielle N Aliano, Neil Barber, Damien M Bolton, Etienne T S Chew, Jeff S Coombes, Michael D Coory, Ian D Davis and 18 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Kidney failure, CKD progression and mortality after nephrectomy.International urology and nephrology · 2022
    Article
  6. Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in 2021: Obsolete.European urology open science · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

28 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Robert J EllisPopulation Health, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia r.ellis1@uq.edu.au.
Sharon J Del VecchioPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Kevin M J GallagherDepartment of Urology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Danielle N AlianoFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6288-5401
Neil BarberUrology Department, Frimley Park Hospital, Frimley, United Kingdom.
Damien M BoltonAustin Urology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Etienne T S ChewUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Jeff S CoombesFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Michael D CooryFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ian D DavisFaculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
James F DonaldsonPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Ross S FrancisPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Graham G GilesFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4946-9099
Glenda C GobePrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Carmel M HawleyPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
David W JohnsonPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Alexander LairdDepartment of Urology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Steve LeungDepartment of Urology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Manar MalkiUrology Department, Frimley Park Hospital, Frimley, United Kingdom.
David J T MarcoFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Alan S McNeillDepartment of Urology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Rachel E NealePopulation Health, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Keng L NgPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Simon PhippsDepartment of Urology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Grant D StewartDepartment of Surgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Victoria M WhiteCancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Simon T WoodPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Susan J JordanPopulation Health, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AUTranslational Research Institute · AUWestern General Hospital · GBThe University of Melbourne · AUFrimley Park Hospital · GBQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AUDeakin University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N002210/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinically significant CKD following surgery for kidney cancer is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, but identifying patients at increased CKD risk remains difficult. Simple methods to stratify risk of clinically significant CKD after nephrectomy are needed.

methodsTo develop a tool for stratifying patients' risk of CKD arising after surgery for kidney cancer, we tested models in a population-based cohort of 699 patients with kidney cancer in Queensland, Australia (2012-2013). We validated these models in a population-based cohort of 423 patients from Victoria, Australia, and in patient cohorts from single centers in Queensland, Scotland, and England. Eligible patients had two functioning kidneys and a preoperative eGFR ≥60 ml/min per 1.73 m

resultsAbsolute risks of stage 3b or higher CKD were <2%, 3% to 14%, 21% to 26%, and 46% to 69% across the four strata of negligible, low, moderate, and high risk, respectively. The negative predictive value of the negligible risk category was 98.9% for clinically significant CKD. The

conclusionsOur simple scoring system can reproducibly stratify postnephrectomy CKD risk on the basis of readily available parameters. This clinical tool's quantitative assessment of CKD risk may be weighed against other considerations when planning management of kidney tumors and help inform shared decision making between clinicians and patients.

Indexed as

Severity of Illness IndexAgedAged, 80 and overEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleGlomerular Filtration RateHumansKidney NeoplasmsLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedNephrectomyPostoperative ComplicationsRenal Insufficiency, ChronicReproducibility of ResultsRisk Assessmentchronic kidney diseaseglomerular filtration ratekidney cancerNephrectomyrenal cell carcinomarisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID32238473
PMCPMC7217412
OpenAlexW3014148133

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.