Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38201472›Full record

ReviewCancers2023

Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Narrative Review of Current Surveillance Strategies for Non-Metastatic Disease.

Jakob Klemm, Kensuke Bekku, Mohammad Abufaraj, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Akihiro Matsukawa, Mehdi Kardoust Parizi, Pierre I Karakiewicz, Shahrokh F Shariat

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 8 institutions in 8 countries.

Jakob KlemmDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20251 Hamburg, Germany.
Kensuke BekkuDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-0002-1592
Mohammad AbufarajDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6603-6319
Ekaterina LaukhtinaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-8953-0272
Akihiro MatsukawaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Mehdi Kardoust PariziDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Pierre I KarakiewiczCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, QC H2X 3E4, Canada.
Shahrokh F ShariatDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Al-Ahliyya Amman University · JOComprehensive Cancer Center Vienna · ATJikei University School of Medicine · JPMcGill University Health Centre · CAOkayama University · JPSechenov University · RUUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Jordan · JO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-metastatic upper urinary tract carcinoma (UTUC) is a comparatively rare condition, typically managed with either kidney-sparing surgery (KSS) or radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Irrespective of the chosen therapeutic modality, patients with UTUC remain at risk of recurrence in the bladder; in patients treated with KSS, the risk of recurrence is high in the remnant ipsilateral upper tract system but there is a low but existent risk in the contralateral system as well as in the chest and in the abdomen/pelvis. For patients treated with RNU for high-risk UTUC, the risk of recurrence in the chest, abdomen, and pelvis, as well as the contralateral UT, depends on the tumor stage, grade, and nodal status. Hence, implementing a risk-stratified, location-specific follow-up is indicated to ensure timely detection of cancer recurrence. However, there are no data on the type and frequency/schedule of follow-up or on the impact of the recurrence type and site on outcomes; indeed, it is not well known whether imaging-detected asymptomatic recurrences confer a better outcome than recurrences detected due to symptoms/signs. Novel imaging techniques and more precise risk stratification methods based on time-dependent probabilistic events hold significant promise for making a cost-efficient individualized, patient-centered, outcomes-oriented follow-up strategy possible. We show and discuss the follow-up protocols of the major urologic societies.

Indexed as

follow-upsurveillanceupper tract urothelial carcinomaurothelial carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID38201472
PMCPMC10777993
OpenAlexW4390058162

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.