ArticleOncology letters2024
Prognostic role of primary tumor size in Wilms tumor.
Article in Oncology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic Value of Pre-Treatment Systemic Inflammatory Markers in Pediatric Unilateral Wilms Tumor.Cancers · 2026Article
- Analysis of prognostic factors and development of a predictive model following radical nephrectomy for Wilms tumor in children.Oncology letters · 2025Article
- Comparison of random survival forest and Cox regression for long-term prognosis of pediatric Wilms tumor: based on the SEER database and external validation cohort from China.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Mechanistic study of CTHRC1 in promoting Wilms' tumor progression by regulating M2-type tumor-associated macrophages polarization.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wilms tumor (WT) is the most common childhood malignant kidney tumor. The aim of the present study was to determine the impact of primary tumor size on the survival of patients with WT. The data of 1,523 patients diagnosed with WT between 2000 and 2017 were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to determine the optimal cut-off value of primary tumor size. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox proportional hazards regression model. The optimal cut-off value for primary tumor size was found to be 11.15 cm. No significant difference in the distribution of tumor size was detected between male and female patients. However, lymph node metastasis and distant metastasis were significantly more frequent in patients whose tumor was ≥11.15 cm in size compared with those with smaller tumors. In addition, patients with larger tumors exhibited significantly worse OS and CSS rates compared with those with smaller tumors. Furthermore, primary tumor size was identified as an independent prognostic factor for OS and CSS in the multivariate analyses. In summary, the present study indicates that primary tumor size is an independent prognostic factor for patients with WT, and tumors ≥11.15 cm are associated with worse OS and CSS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.