Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38819448›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2024

Clear cell and non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma in young adults: clinicopathological features, survival outcomes and prognostic factors.

Zixuan Xue, Shiying Tang, Junyong Ou, Yangyi Fang, Min Qiu, Kai Hong, Xiaojun Tian, Hongxian Zhang, Cheng Liu, Lulin Ma and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

11 authors.

Zixuan Xue *Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.
Shiying Tang *Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.
Junyong OuDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.
Yangyi FangDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.
Min QiuDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China. qiumin@bjmu.edu.cn.
Kai HongDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China. kenhong99@bjmu.edu.cn.
Xiaojun TianDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.
Hongxian ZhangDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.
Cheng LiuDepartment of Urology, Shanghai First Peoples Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Lulin MaDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.
Shudong ZhangDepartment of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100083, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesRenal cell carcinoma (RCC) is infrequent among young adults. Few studies reported the outcome of RCC in young adults by pathological subtypes. The purpose of this study was to explore the clinicopathological features, survival outcomes and prognostic factors of young adult patients with clear cell (CCRCC) and non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (NCCRCC).

methodsThis study included young adult patients aged 18-40 years who were diagnosed as renal cell carcinoma (RCC) between 2012 and 2022 at Peking University Third Hospital. All patients underwent either partial nephrectomy or radical nephrectomy, and some received adjuvant therapy. A comparative analysis was performed to investigate the differences in clinicopathological characteristics between the cohort of CCRCC and NCCRCC. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was utilized to plot survival curves for young adults with RCC. The univariate and multifactorial prognostic analyses were conducted using the log-rank test and COX proportional hazards model.

resultsA total of 300 RCC patients aged 18-40 years were performed, of which 201 were diagnosed with CCRCC (67%) and 99 were diagnosed with NCCRCC(33%). The NCCRCC included 29 cases (9.7%) of chromophobe RCC, 28 cases (9.3%) of MiT family translocation RCC, 22 cases (7.3%) of papillary RCC, 11 cases (3.7%) of low malignant potential multifocal cystic RCC, and 6 cases of unclassified RCC (2.0%), 2 cases of mucinous tubule and spindle cell carcinoma (0.7%), and 1 case of FH-deficient RCC (0.3%).The mean age was 33.4 ± 6.1 years old. The overall and progression free 5-year survival rate was 99.1 and 95.3%, respectively. The NCCRCC cohort demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in progression-free survival (PFS) rate when compared to the CCRCC cohort (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference observed in overall survival (OS) (p = 0.069). Pathological stage was a significant independent predictor for OS (p = 0.045). Pathological stage and nuclear grade were both independent predictors for PFS (p = 0.020; p = 0.005).

conclusionsThe clinical and pathological features of young adults diagnosed with CCRCC exhibit notable distinctions from those of NCCRCC patients. The survival outcome was significantly influenced by the pathological stage, while both the nuclear grade and pathological stage had a significant impact on tumor progression. This study offered significant contributions to the understanding of the clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic determinants of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in young adults.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Renal CellKidney NeoplasmsAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleNephrectomyPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateYoung AdultClear cell RCCNon-clear cell RCCSurvival analysisYoung adults

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.