ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
Survival and prognostic factors in rare urothelial carcinoma of the prostate compared to adenocarcinoma of the prostate: a propensity score matched analysis based on the SEER database.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic factors and the role of pelvic lymph node dissection in oligometastatic prostate cancer: a multicenter exploratory study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Critical appraisal of methodological limitations in adrenal tuberculosis outcome studies.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Refining experimental design and translational relevance in tetramethylpyrazine studies on contrast-induced acute kidney injury.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor: Exploring the influencing factors of abdominal aortic calcification events in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and non-CKD patients based on interpretable machine learning methods.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Comment on the study: "Uncovering hidden risks: metabolic and inflammatory insights in normoalbuminuric chronic kidney disease".International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Comment on "Uncovering hidden risks: metabolic and inflammatory insights in normoalbuminuric chronic kidney disease".International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Challenges and perspectives in traditional Chinese medicine intervention for uremic pruritus: emphasis on blinding, mechanisms, and safety assessment.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Clinical insights on "Analyzing the association of estimated pulse wave velocity with the risk and mortality of chronic kidney disease: a study based on the NHANES database".International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- The missing links in mitochondrial MR studies for CKD: tissue specificity and clinical relevance; a letter to the editor.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- From conventional scores to explainable AI: a six-method comparative framework for failure prediction in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.World journal of urology · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare survival outcomes between patients with urothelial carcinoma of the prostate (UPC) and adenocarcinoma of the prostate (APC) and to explore the prognostic factors of UPC.
methodsData from prostate cancer patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2019 were extracted from the SEER database. This study included 800,896 APC cases and 95 UPC cases. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a ratio of 1:1 was used to generate comparable cohorts. Multivariable Cox models determined the risks of cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and overall mortality (OM) for UPC compared to APC. Lastly, univariate and multivariate COX regression analyses identified independent risk and protective factors for CSM and OM in UPC patients.
resultsUPC patients were older at diagnosis (median age 75 vs. 66 y, p < 0.001) and had more regional or distant tumor stages (32.6% vs. 17.6%, p < 0.001) compared to APC patients. Though receiving more surgery (61.1% vs. 38.5%, p < 0.001), radiotherapy (7.4% vs. 3.1%, p < 0.05), and systemic treatment recorded (11.6% vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001), UPC patients showed significantly shorter median survival (21 m vs. 75 m, p < 0.001), along with higher risks of CSM (HR 5.58, 95% CI 2.59-11.99, p < 0.001) and OM (HR 3.73, 95% CI 2.34-5.95, p < 0.001) after PSM. Subgroup analysis of UPC revealed that advanced stage was an independent risk factor for CSM (p < 0.001). Older age and advanced stage raised OM risk (p < 0.001), while systemic treatment recorded was associated with reduced CSM and OM risks (p < 0.05).
conclusionOur study highlighted the poorer prognosis of UPC compared to APC, with significant higher CSM and OM. Advanced stage increased CSM risk, while older age and advanced stage increased OM risk. Systemic treatment recorded was associated with improved outcomes on CSM and OM, emphasizing the importance of advancements in diagnosis and treatment for improving UPC prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41455065What 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.