ArticleCancers2025
Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Neoadjuvant vs. Adjuvant Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma.
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neoadjuvant therapies for clear cell renal cell carcinoma: review of current evidence and future applications.World journal of urology · 2026Review
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
objectiveThe aim was to compare outcomes in high-risk localized RCC (HRL-RCC) patients treated with adjuvant (AT) and neoadjuvant therapy (NT) utilizing a propensity score-matched model (PSM).
methodsWe conducted a multicenter analysis (USA and Japan) for patients who underwent AT or NT. AT was defined as systemic therapy given postoperatively in the absence of metastases; NT was presurgical therapy in the setting of localized disease. AT and NT utilized included target molecular therapy (TMT) or immunotherapy (IO). The PSM model was generated using a nearest neighbor matching algorithm in a 1:2 ratio. The primary outcome was All-Cause Mortality (ACM); the secondary outcomes were Cancer-Specific Mortality (CSM) and recurrence. Cox regression multivariable analysis (MVA) was utilized to elucidate predictors of outcomes.
resultsAfter PSM modeling, 311 patients were analyzed [adjuvant
conclusionsOur findings suggest a potential advantage of NT in HRL-RCC. Adjuvant immunotherapy was associated with decreased risk of ACM, while in the neoadjuvant group, TMT and IO therapy had similar outcomes. Our findings call for the consideration of a clinical trial to compare the outcomes of AT vs. NT.
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.