Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37668600›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2023

Kidney Function and Risk of Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Karine Alcala, Hana Zahed, Ricardo Cortez Cardoso Penha, Nicolas Alcala, Hilary A Robbins, Karl Smith-Byrne, Richard M Martin, David C Muller, Paul Brennan, Mattias Johansson

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2023. 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Karine AlcalaGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2308-9880
Hana ZahedGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5731-8859
Ricardo Cortez Cardoso PenhaGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2847-1993
Nicolas AlcalaGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5961-5064
Hilary A RobbinsGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6041-6866
Karl Smith-ByrneCancer Epidemiology Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1932-7463
Richard M MartinPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7992-7719
David C MullerImperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2350-0417
Paul BrennanGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0518-8714
Mattias JohanssonGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-3116-5081
Centre international de recherche sur le cancer · FRThe London College · GBUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 29017Cancer Research UK 29019Cancer Research UK C18281/A29019Department of Health BRC-1215-20011Department of Health NIHR202411Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/4Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/6Medical Research Council MC_UU_00032/1World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe evaluated the temporal association between kidney function, assessed by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and the risk of incident renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We also evaluated whether eGFR could improve RCC risk discrimination beyond established risk factors.

methodsWe analyzed the UK Biobank cohort, including 463,178 participants of whom 1,447 were diagnosed with RCC during 5,696,963 person-years of follow-up. We evaluated the temporal association between eGFR and RCC risk using flexible parametric survival models, adjusted for C-reactive protein and RCC risk factors. eGFR was calculated from creatinine and cystatin C levels.

resultsLower eGFR, an indication of poor kidney function, was associated with higher RCC risk when measured up to 5 years prior to diagnosis. The RCC HR per SD decrease in eGFR when measured 1 year before diagnosis was 1.26 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.16-1.37], and 1.11 (95% CI, 1.05-1.17) when measured 5 years before diagnosis. Adding eGFR to the RCC risk model provided a small improvement in risk discrimination 1 year before diagnosis with an AUC of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.67-0.84) compared with the published model (0.69; 95% CI, 0.63-0.79).

conclusionsThis study demonstrated that kidney function markers are associated with RCC risk, but the nature of these associations are consistent with reversed causality. Markers of kidney function provided limited improvements in RCC risk discrimination beyond established risk factors. IMPACT: eGFR may be of potential use to identify individuals in the extremes of the risk distribution.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Renal CellKidney NeoplasmsRenal Insufficiency, ChronicCreatinineGlomerular Filtration RateHumansKidneyRisk FactorsCreatinine

Identifiers

PMID37668600
PMCPMC10618735
OpenAlexW4386437909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.