Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38426157›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2024

Prognostic role of primary tumor size in Wilms tumor.

Kai Li, Ke Zhang, Hexing Yuan, Caibin Fan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Kai LiDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Suzhou, Jiangsu 215000, P.R. China.
Ke ZhangDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Suzhou, Jiangsu 215000, P.R. China.
Hexing YuanDepartment of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu 215000, P.R. China.
Caibin FanDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Suzhou, Jiangsu 215000, P.R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

cancer specific survivaloverall survivalprimary tumor sizeprognosisWilms tumor

Identifiers

PMID38426157
PMCPMC10902748

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.