ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
The survival benefit of metastasectomy for metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of pulmonary metastasectomy in urological cancer: insights from a retrospective cohort.PeerJ · 2026Article
- Right atrial metastasis after renal cell carcinoma operation: a case report.AME case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to explore the benefit the metastasectomy for patients with metastatic non-clear cell carcinoma (non-ccRCC).
methodsThis study enrolled 120 patients with confirmed metastatic non-ccRCC from the RCC database of our center from 2008 to 2021. Patients without metastasectomy were grouped as radical nephrectomy without metastasectomy patients. The clinical outcomes included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to assess potential factors that predict clinical benefits from metastasectomy.
resultsA total of 100 patients received radical nephrectomy alone, while the remaining 20 patients underwent both radical nephrectomy and metastasectomy. There was no significant difference in age between the two groups. Out of 100 patients who underwent radical nephrectomy, 60 were male, and out of 20 patients who had both radical nephrectomy and metastasectomy, 12 were male. Patients who underwent systemic therapy plus radical nephrectomy and metastasectomy had significantly better PFS (27.1 vs. 14.0, p = 0.032) and OS (67.3 vs. 24.0, p = 0.043) than those who underwent systemic therapy plus radical nephrectomy alone. Furthermore, for patients without liver metastasis (n = 54), systemic therapy plus radical nephrectomy and metastasectomy improved both PFS (p = 0.028) and OS (p = 0.043). Similarly, for patients with metachronous metastasis, systemic therapy plus radical nephrectomy and metastasectomy improved both PFS (p = 0.043) and OS (p = 0.032). None of the patients experienced serious perioperative complications (Clavien-Dindo Classification ≥ III grade).
conclusionMetastasectomy in patients with metastatic non-ccRCC may provide clinical benefits in terms of improved PFS and OS, especially in patients without liver metastasis and those with metachronous metastasis.
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.