ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Pulmonary lesion after surgery for renal cancer: progression or new primary?
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.
- New insights into imaging of pulmonary metastases from extra-thoracic neoplasms.La Radiologia medica · 2025Review
- Comment on "pulmonary lesion after surgery for renal cancer: progression or new primary?"World journal of urology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate clinical and radiological differences between kidney metastases to the lung (RCCM +) and metachronous lung cancer (LC) detected during follow-up in patients surgically treated for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC).
methodscM0 surgically-treated RCC who harbored a pulmonary mass during follow-up were retrospectively scrutinized. Univariate logistic regression assessed predictive features for differentiating between LC and RCCM + . Multivariable analyses (MVA) were fitted to predict factors that could influence time between detection and histological diagnosis of the pulmonary mass, and how this interval could impact on survivals.
results87% had RCCM + and 13% had LC. LC were more likely to have smoking history (75% vs. 29%, p < 0.001) and less aggressive RCC features (cT1-2: 94% vs. 65%, p = 0.01; pT1-2: 88% vs. 41%, p = 0.02; G1-2: 88% vs. 37%, p < 0.001). The median interval between RCC surgery and lung mass detection was longer between LC (55 months [32.8-107.2] vs. 20 months [9.0-45.0], p = 0.01). RCCM + had a higher likelihood of multiple (3[1-4] vs. 1[1-1], p < 0.001) and bilateral (51% vs. 6%, p = 0.002) pulmonary nodules, whereas LC usually presented with a solitary pulmonary nodule, less than 20 mm. Univariate analyses revealed that smoking history (OR:0.79; 95% CI 0.70-0.89; p < 0.001) and interval between RCC surgery and lung mass detection (OR:0.99; 95% CI 0.97-1.00; p = 0.002) predicted a higher risk of LC. Conversely, size (OR:1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.04; p = 0.003), clinical stage (OR:1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23; p < 0.001), pathological stage (OR:1.14; 95% CI 1.07-1.22; p < 0.001), grade (OR:1.15; 95% CI 1.07-1.23; p < 0.001), presence of necrosis (OR:1.17; 95% CI 1.04-1.32; p = 0.01), and lymphovascular invasion (OR:1.18; 95% CI 1.01-1.37; p = 0.03) of primary RCC predicted a higher risk of RCCM + . Furthermore, number (OR:1.08; 95% CI 1.04-1.12; p < 0.001) and bilaterality (OR:1.23; 95% CI 1.09-1.38; p < 0.001) of pulmonary lesions predicted a higher risk of RCCM + . Survival analysis showed a median second PFS of 10.9 years (95% CI 3.3-not reached) for LC and a 3.8 years (95% CI 3.2-8.4) for RCCM + . The median OS time was 6.5 years (95% CI 4.4-not reached) for LC and 6 years (95% CI 4.3-11.6) for RCCM + .
conclusionsSmoking history, primary grade and stage of RCC, interval between RCC surgery and lung mass detection, and number of pulmonary lesions appear to be the most valuable predictors for differentiating new primary lung cancer from RCC progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38814376What 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.