ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026
Adjuvant therapy for renal cell carcinoma: lessons from past failures and new opportunities in the era of immune checkpoint inhibition.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. 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.
- Bioinformatics analysis and experimental validation confirm COL6A3 as a promising target for renal cell carcinoma therapy.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has historically posed a significant therapeutic challenge in the adjuvant setting. Although surgical resection remains the cornerstone of curative-intent treatment for localized disease, a substantial proportion of patients with high-risk pathological features will experience recurrence following nephrectomy. Over several decades, multiple adjuvant strategies, including cytokine-based immunotherapy and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted agents, failed to deliver consistent disease-free or overall survival benefits, often limited by toxicity and poor tolerability. These repeated disappointments reinforced the perception that effective adjuvant therapy in RCC was elusive. The emergence of immune checkpoint inhibition has fundamentally reshaped this landscape, with adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrating disease-free and overall survival benefit in selected patients with resected clear-cell RCC at increased risk of recurrence, including those with M1 no evidence of disease, thereby establishing a new standard of care for certain high-risk populations. In contrast, several contemporaneous trials evaluating alternative immune checkpoint strategies failed to meet primary endpoints, underscoring that benefit is not class-wide and is highly dependent on patient selection and disease biology. Against this background, rather than simply tracing the historical evolution of adjuvant therapy, this review examines the broader challenges of adjuvant management after RCC resection, including why most postoperative approaches failed, how current evidence has redefined care for selected patients, and what barriers remain to optimizing outcomes. Particular emphasis is placed on recurrence risk assessment, patient selection, treatment-related toxicity, and the need for biomarker-driven, precision-based strategies to guide the next generation of adjuvant treatment.
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.