Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37024421›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology focus2023

Development and External Validation of a Novel Nomogram Predicting Cancer-specific Mortality-free Survival in Surgically Treated Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients.

Mattia Luca Piccinelli, Francesco Barletta, Stefano Tappero, Cristina Cano Garcia, Reha-Baris Incesu, Simone Morra, Lukas Scheipner, Zhe Tian, Stefano Luzzago, Francesco A Mistretta and 12 more

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European urology focus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

Mattia Luca PiccinelliCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Francesco BarlettaCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Stefano TapperoCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Urology, IRCCS Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy; Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Cristina Cano GarciaCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Reha-Baris IncesuCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Simone MorraCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Neurosciences, Science of Reproduction and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Lukas ScheipnerCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Urology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Zhe TianCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Stefano LuzzagoDepartment of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Haemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Francesco A MistrettaDepartment of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Haemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Matteo FerroDepartment of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Fred SaadCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Shahrokh F ShariatDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Hourani Center of Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan.
Sascha AhyaiDepartment of Urology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Nicola LongoDepartment of Neurosciences, Science of Reproduction and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Derya TilkiMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Felix K H ChunDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Carlo TerroneDepartment of Urology, IRCCS Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy; Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Alberto BrigantiDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Ottavio de CobelliDepartment of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Haemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Gennaro MusiDepartment of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Haemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Pierre I KarakiewiczCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate prediction of cancer control outcomes in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients is important for counselling, follow-up planning, and selection of appropriate adjuvant trial designs.

objectiveTo develop and externally validate a novel contemporary population-based model for predicting cancer-specific mortality-free survival (CSM-FS) in surgically treated papillary RCC (papRCC) patients and to compare it with established risk categories (Leibovich 2018). DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsWithin the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2019), we identified surgically treated papRCC patients (n = 3978). The population was randomly divided into development (50%, n = 1989) and external validation (50%, n = 1989) cohorts. Of the external validation cohort, 97% (n = 1930) of patients were included in a head-to-head comparison of the Leibovich 2018 risk categories addressing nonmetastatic patients. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Univariable Cox regression models tested the statistical significance in the prediction of CSM-FS. The most parsimonious model with the best validation metrics was selected as the multivariable nomogram. Accuracy, calibration, and decision curve analyses (DCAs) tested the Cox regression-based nomogram, as well as the Leibovich 2018 risk categories in the external validation cohort. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Age at diagnosis, grade, T stage, N stage, and M stage qualified for inclusion in the novel nomogram. In external validation, the accuracy of the novel nomogram was 0.83 at 5 yr and 0.80 at 10 yr. In nonmetastatic patients, 5- and 10-yr accuracy of the novel nomogram was 0.77 and 0.76, respectively. Conversely, 5- and 10-yr accuracy of the Leibovich 2018 risk categories was 0.70 and 0.66, respectively. The novel nomogram exhibited smaller departures from ideal predictions in calibration plots and higher net benefit in DCAs, when it was compared with the Leibovich 2018 risk categories. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study, absence of a central pathological review, and inclusion of only North American patients.

conclusionsThe novel nomogram may represent a valuable clinical aid, when papRCC CSM-FS predictions are required. PATIENT SUMMARY: We developed an accurate tool to predict death due to papillary kidney cancer in a North American population.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Renal CellKidney NeoplasmsHumansNephrectomyNomogramsPrognosisRetrospective StudiesCancer-specific mortalityPapillary kidney cancerPrognostic model

Identifiers

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.