ArticleThe oncologist2025
Examining the evolving landscape of kidney cancer mortality in the United States.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKidney cancer (KC) remains a significant contributor to cancer-related mortality in the United States, with an alarming increase in disease burden. To address this critical health issue, this study aims to investigate trends in KC mortality.
methodsWe retrieved mortality data from the Center for Disease Control WONDER database using the International Classification of Diseases 10 code C64. Age Standardized Mortality Rates (ASMRs) per 100 000 population were divided by age/gender/race/ethnicity-American Indian or Alaskan Native (AIAN)/Asian/African American (AA)/White/Hispanic/non-Hispanic-from 1999 to 2020. Joinpoint regression is conducted to calculate Average Annual Percentage Changes (AAPCs) and compare trends.
resultsA total of 284 224 deaths were reported. In 2020, the greatest ASMR was in Whites (3.9/100.000), followed by AIANs (3.5), AA (3.3), and Asians (1.6). ASMRs were 3.2 for Hispanics and 3.5 for non-Hispanics, with decreases of 11.4% and 12.5%; 5.0 for males and 2.1 for females, with decreases of 13.8% and 22.2%, respectively. AIAN males experienced the greatest ASMR decrease (44.3%), White males the smallest (1.7%). AIAN (AAPC = -1.9%), and AA (AAPC = -1.3%) showed a single negative trend line, while ASMRs in Asian (AAPC = -0.6%) and White population (AAPC = -0.6%) initially increased then declined. Younger populations experienced greater decreases, whereas populations over 85 had increasing ASMRs.
conclusionsOver 20 years, the greatest ASMR shifted from AIAN to White individuals, with a nationally decreasing trend. The elderly and male populations continue to experience greater ASMRs. Overall, our findings provide key insights for identifying at-risk populations, guiding the development of targeted strategies to reduce disparities.
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.