Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36525162›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2022

Patient-reported experiences with side effects of kidney cancer therapies and corresponding information flow.

Karin Kastrati, Viktoria Mathies, Anna P Kipp, Jutta Huebner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Nutritional care in metastatic RCC: patient experiences and reported unaddressed needs.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Patient Voices in Rheumatic Immune-related Adverse Events.Rheumatic diseases clinics of North America · 2024
    Review
  7. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karin KastratiKlinik Für Innere Medizin II, University Hospital Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. karin.kastrati@uni-jena.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2312-6485
Viktoria MathiesUniversitätsTumorCentrum Jena, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.
Anna P KippDepartment of Nutritional Physiology, Institute of Nutritional Sciences, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.
Jutta HuebnerKlinik Für Innere Medizin II, University Hospital Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Jena University Hospital · DEFriedrich Schiller University Jena · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have improved over recent years. Various therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma are currently approved for first and successive lines. Having various treatment options makes it important to reflect how patients experience side effects in the real-world setting. So far, data on the side effects of these treatments have only been collected within clinical trials, and have been mostly assessed by the investigator and not as patient-reported outcomes. Our aim was to determine patient-reported experiences of side effects in the real-world setting and to evaluate the doctor-patient communication regarding side effects. Data were collected via an anonymous, voluntary online survey given to members of a support group for RCC; the questionnaire was completed by 104 mRCC patients.

results89.1% of participants were suffering from side effects of any grade. These appeared to be higher for patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors compared to those treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (98.4% vs. 68.4%). However, information on side effects is scarce: 4.0% had never heard anything about them while only 18.8% of participants received detailed information on possible side effects. Although 85.6% of participants reported side effects to their physician, 34.6% did not encounter an improvement. Limitations of the study include the design as an online questionnaire and the small sample, consisting only of members of a support group.

conclusionsDifferences can be seen between patient-reported side effects within our survey and those based on clinical trials. A shift towards more patient-reported outcomes is needed. In addition, patients seeking the advice of their physician on side effects are in need of more-or better-information and support.

Indexed as

Kidney cancerNutrition related symptomsPatient-reportedRenal cell carcinomaSide effect

Identifiers

PMID36525162
PMCPMC9758261
OpenAlexW4311931993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.