Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34343338›Full record

ArticleCancer2021

Genetic risk assessment for hereditary renal cell carcinoma: Clinical consensus statement.

Gennady Bratslavsky, Neil Mendhiratta, Michael Daneshvar, James Brugarolas, Mark W Ball, Adam Metwalli, Katherine L Nathanson, Phillip M Pierorazio, Ronald S Boris, Eric A Singer and 24 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Validation ofFrontiers in medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Precision Medicine: Seeing the Tree in the Forest!Journal of kidney cancer and VHL · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Plasma proteome fingerprint in kidney diseases.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

34 authors at 20 institutions in 2 countries.

Gennady BratslavskyDepartment of Urology, State University of New York (SUNY, Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York.
Neil MendhirattaDepartment of Urology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.ORCID 0000-0002-4071-3094
Michael DaneshvarDepartment of Urology, State University of New York (SUNY, Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York.
James BrugarolasDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Texas (UT) Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Mark W BallUrologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0003-1780-2627
Adam MetwalliDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, Howard University Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia.
Katherine L NathansonDivision of Human Genetics and Translational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Phillip M PierorazioBrady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Ronald S BorisIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Eric A SingerSection of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Maria I CarloMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Mary B DalyDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Elizabeth P HenskeDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Colette HyattSidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Lindsay MiddletonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Texas (UT) Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Gloria MorrisDepartment of Urology, State University of New York (SUNY, Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York.
Anhyo JeongDepartment of Urology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Vivek NarayanAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
W Kimryn RathmellDepartment of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
Ulka VaishampayanDepartment of Oncology, Karmanos Cancer Center/Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.ORCID 0000-0001-5800-4571
Bruce H LeeDriven To Cure, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Dena BattleThe Kidney Cancer Research Alliance, Leesburg, Virginia.
Michael J HallDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Khaled HafezDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Michael A S JewettDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Christina KaramboulasDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sumanta K PalDepartment of Medical Oncology, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California.ORCID 0000-0002-1712-0848
A Ari HakimiMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Alexander KutikovDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Othon IliopoulosMassachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
W Marston LinehanUrologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Eric JonaschThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Ramaprasad SrinivasanUrologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Brian ShuchDepartment of Urology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.ORCID 0000-0003-2065-3570
Fox Chase Cancer Center · USNational Cancer Institute · USSUNY Upstate Medical University · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre · CASouthwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USCity of Hope · USHoward University Hospital · USIndiana University School of MedicineJohns Hopkins University · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USThomas Jefferson University · USUniversity of Michigan · USVanderbilt University · USWayne State University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
TRANSCRIPTIONAL PROFILINGP30CA072720 · NCI · UNIV OF MED/DENT NJ-R W JOHNSON MED SCH · PI Tracie Saunders · 1997 to 2026
$94.5M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NCI NIH HHS P30 CA072720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is believed to have a strong hereditary component, there is a paucity of published guidelines for genetic risk assessment. A panel of experts was convened to gauge current opinions.

methodsA North American multidisciplinary panel with expertise in hereditary RCC, including urologists, medical oncologists, clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, and patient advocates, was convened. Before the summit, a modified Delphi methodology was used to generate, review, and curate a set of consensus questions regarding RCC genetic risk assessment. Uniform consensus was defined as ≥85% agreement on particular questions.

resultsThirty-three panelists, including urologists (n = 13), medical oncologists (n = 12), genetic counselors and clinical geneticists (n = 6), and patient advocates (n = 2), reviewed 53 curated consensus questions. Uniform consensus was achieved on 30 statements in specific areas that addressed for whom, what, when, and how genetic testing should be performed. Topics of consensus included the family history criteria, which should trigger further assessment, the need for risk assessment in those with bilateral or multifocal disease and/or specific histology, the utility of multigene panel testing, and acceptance of clinician-based counseling and testing by those who have experience with hereditary RCC.

conclusionsIn the first ever consensus panel on RCC genetic risk assessment, 30 consensus statements were reached. Areas that require further research and discussion were also identified, with a second future meeting planned. This consensus statement may provide further guidance for clinicians when considering RCC genetic risk assessment. LAY SUMMARY: The contribution of germline genetics to the development of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has long been recognized. However, there is a paucity of guidelines to define how and when genetic risk assessment should be performed for patients with known or suspected hereditary RCC. Without guidelines, clinicians struggle to define who requires further evaluation, when risk assessment or testing should be done, which genes should be considered, and how counseling and/or testing should be performed. To this end, a multidisciplinary panel of national experts was convened to gauge current opinion on genetic risk assessment in RCC and to enumerate a set of recommendations to guide clinicians when evaluating individuals with suspected hereditary kidney cancer.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Renal CellKidney NeoplasmsConsensusGenetic TestingHumansRisk Assessmentclinical consensusgenetic risk assessmentgenetic testinggermline mutationshereditary kidney cancerrecommendationsrenal cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID34343338
PMCPMC8711633
OpenAlexW3189112222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.