Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33502887›Full record

ArticleNeoplasma2021

Stage I testicular seminoma risk-adapted therapeutic management.

Bela Mrinakova, Karol Kajo, Viera Lehotska, Martina Ondrusova, Sona Balogova, Zuzana Pinakova, Vera Novotna, Vanda Usakova, Lucia Fedorkova, Iveta Waczulikova and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neoplasma, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 51% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bela Mrinakova1st Department of Oncology, Comenius University, Faculty of Medicine and St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Karol KajoDepartment of Pathology, Slovak Medical University, St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Viera Lehotska2nd Department of Radiology, Comenius University, Faculty of Medicine and St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Martina OndrusovaPharm-In, Ltd, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Sona BalogovaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Comenius University, Faculty of Medicine and St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Zuzana Pinakova1st Department of Oncology, Comenius University, Faculty of Medicine and St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Vera Novotna1st Department of Oncology, Comenius University, Faculty of Medicine and St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Vanda UsakovaDepartment of Medical Oncology, St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Lucia Fedorkova1st Department of Oncology, Comenius University, Faculty of Medicine and St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Iveta WaczulikovaDepartment of Nuclear Physics and Biophysics, Division of Biomedical Physics, Comenius University, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Juraj KausitzDepartment of Radioimmunodiagnostics, St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Dalibor Ondrus1st Department of Oncology, Comenius University, Faculty of Medicine and St. Elisabeth Cancer Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Comenius University Bratislava · SK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following orchiectomy, patients with clinical stage I (CSI) testicular seminoma may be managed by active surveillance (S) or adjuvant treatment (radiotherapy or chemotherapy). In view of the published data on long-term toxicity, especially second malignant neoplasms (SMNs), adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) is currently no longer recommended as an adjuvant therapy option for these patients. The purpose of our recent study was to compare the impact of two selected treatment approaches - S versus adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) on the survival of patients with CSI testicular seminoma. This cross-sectional study analyzed a total of 139 patients collected at a single center between 10/2011-5/2020, with CSI testicular seminoma, stratified into two groups according to risk-adapted therapeutic approaches. In the S group (low-risk - without rete testis invasion - RTI, primary tumor size <4 cm), consisting of 77 patients, who underwent S, relapse occurred in 10 (13.0%) patients after a mean follow-up of 14.3 months. In the ACT group (high-risk - RTI and/or primary tumor size >4 cm), consisting of 62 patients, who were treated with ACT, relapse occurred in 5 (8.1%) patients after a mean follow-up of 11.6 months. Overall survival of patients in both groups was 100% with a mean follow-up of 43.9 months. A statistically significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) between these two groups was not found. Based on our findings, ACT seems to be an adequate treatment for patients with a high risk of relapse, as well as S for those with a low risk of relapse. Despite its excellent prognosis, optimal management of CSI testicular seminoma remains controversial, with variations in expert opinion and international guidelines.

Indexed as

SeminomaTesticular NeoplasmsChemotherapy, AdjuvantCombined Modality TherapyCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingRadiotherapy, Adjuvant

Identifiers

PMID33502887
OpenAlexW3122367487

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.