ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Prognostic implications and diagnostic significance of TFE3 rearrangement in renal cell carcinoma.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- From fusion partner to clinical practice: A treatment-oriented framework for transcription factor E3 (Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2026Review
- Article
- Review
- Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective study compared with clear cell renal cell carcinoma using propensity score matching.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Case Report: ExtrarenalFrontiers in oncology · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the impact of TFE3 rearrangement, analyzing clinicopathological features that influence renal cell carcinoma (RCC) recurrence, and clarify the role of immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining in diagnosis.
methodsWe screened patients diagnosed of clear cell RCC (ccRCC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed on all TFE3 positive IHC tumors. Clinicopathological and survival features were collected for analysis.
resultsOut of 695 patients treated for renal tumors, 478 (68.7%) were ccRCC and 22 were suspected of TFE3 rearrangement based on IHC. Subsequent testing revealed 8 (1.15%) were positive in the FISH test (TFE3-rearranged-RCC) and 14 (2.01%) tested negative. No significant differences were noted in general characteristics among the three groups, except for age, TFE3-rearranged-RCC were younger than ccRCC (median age, 49 vs. 58 years, p=0.02). TFE3-rearranged-RCC exhibited a significant higher recurrence rate compared to ccRCC (50% vs 18.8%) and multivariate analysis revealed that TFE3 rearrangement, along with tumor size and metastasis, was an independent prognostic factor for recurrence (HR=4.6; 95% CI 1.1-21.2; p=0.05). Survival analysis demonstrated a significant shorter PFS (progression-free survival) for TFE3-rearranged-RCC compared to ccRCC.
conclusionsTFE3 rearrangement is an independent prognostic factor for recurrence and contributes to a worse PFS, suggesting the necessity of careful follow-up. Diagnosis should be confirmed using FISH due to low specificity of IHC. Further studies are needed to confirm TFE3 IHC staining as a prognostic factor.
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.