Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39908206›Full record

SynthesisInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology

Urachal Carcinomas: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Caio Vinícius Suartz, Lucas Motta Martinez, Marcelo Henrique Lima Silvestre, Richard Dobrucki Lima, Pedro Henrique Souza Brito, Ketlyn Assunção Galhardo, Roberto Iglesias Lopes, Victor Hondo Silva Moraes, Caio Mazzonetto Teofilo Moraes, Luana Covatti and 11 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Clinical landscape of urachal carcinoma: a two-decade real-world study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Telesurgery in Urology is the Hot Topic in this Number of International Brazilian Journal of Urology.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    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

21 authors.

Caio Vinícius SuartzDepartment of Urology, Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Lucas Motta MartinezDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Marcelo Henrique Lima SilvestreDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Richard Dobrucki LimaDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Pedro Henrique Souza BritoDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Ketlyn Assunção GalhardoDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Roberto Iglesias LopesDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Victor Hondo Silva MoraesDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Caio Mazzonetto Teofilo MoraesDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Luana CovattiDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Maria Fernanda Dias AzevedoFaculdade Israelita Albert Einstein de Ciências da Saúde (FICSAE), Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein (HIAE), São Paulo, Brasil.
Lucas Schenk AlmeidaDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Debora Narumi Demitrol SetoueDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Natália Doratioto Serrano Faria BrazDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
José BessaUniversidade Estadual de Feira de Santana - UEFS, Secretaria de Saúde, Feira de Santana, BA, Brasil.
Fernando KorkesDivisão de Urologia, Oncologia Urológica, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC - FMABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Leonardo O ReisDivisão de Oncologia Urológica, Divisão de UroScience, Universidade Estadual de Campinas - Unicamp, Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil.
Kátia Ramos Moreira LeiteDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
William Carlos NahasDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Paul TorenCHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Leopoldo Alves Ribeiro-FilhoDivisão de Urologia, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aim to consolidate current evidence on the diagnosis, epidemiology, and treatment of urachal carcinoma, a rare malignancy with limited data. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE was conducted up to September 2024 to identify studies involving patients with urachal carcinoma, reporting clinical epidemiological characteristics, diagnostic strategies, histopathological findings, tumor staging, treatment modalities, and oncological outcomes. Extracted data were systematically synthesized, and statistical analyses, including a single-arm meta-analysis, were performed to comprehensively evaluate oncological outcomes.

resultsOur study includes 1,901 cases of urachal carcinoma from 50 studies. The findings support the oncologic advantage of en-bloc resection with umbilectomy in localized disease, demonstrating improved survival outcomes and reduced recurrence rates. In the adjuvant setting, those receiving cisplatin-based therapy presented the best response, with 65.73% with no disease progression; similarly, in the metastatic disease, cisplatin-based regimens seem to have better responses in metastatic disease. The single-arm meta-analysis estimated a 5-year overall survival rate of 51% (95% CI: 0.49-0.54). Tumor recurrence was documented in 35% of cases (95% CI: 0.25-0.45), with local recurrence occurring in 28% (95% CI: 0.18-0.38), with the average time to recurrence of 27.6 months.

conclusionOur study provides the most comprehensive review of urachal carcinoma to date, providing evidence to guide clinical decisions. It underscores the oncologic benefits of en-bloc resection with umbilectomy and specific chemotherapeutic regimens. Emerging alternative therapies also show potential, highlighting the need for further research to optimize patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Urinary Bladder NeoplasmsHumansSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeSystematic Review [Publication Type]UCystectomyUrachal cancer [Supplementary Concept]

Identifiers

PMID39908206
PMCPMC12052028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.