ArticleDiscover oncology2026
Tumor size predicts metastatic disease at diagnosis and prognosis in unilateral Wilms tumor: a population based study with external validation.
Article in Discover oncology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of tumor size on prognosis, metastasis, and treatment response in Wilms tumor (WT) remains incompletely understood. This study aimed to elucidate the influence of tumor size on survival, metastatic risk, and the efficacy of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in WT patients.
methodsWe analyzed WT patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program (2000-2022) and from our institution's electronic medical records (2013-2024). Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. Prognostic factors were identified via univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, and propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics.
resultsA total of 1916 patients from the SEER cohort and 237 patients from our institutional cohort with WT were included in this study. In the SEER cohort, patients with tumor size > 10.4 cm had significantly worse survival compared to those with tumors ≤ 10.4 cm. Restricted cubic spline (RCS) analysis revealed linear associations between tumor size and patient outcomes for overall survival (OS) (p overall = 0.011, p nonlinear = 0.906) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (p overall = 0.010, p nonlinear = 0.998). Multivariate analysis confirmed that larger tumor size was an independent risk factor for poorer OS (HR = 1.79, p = 0.011). The metastasis rate was significantly lower in the small tumor group than in the large tumor group (87/762 vs. 187/880, p < 0.001). Among all patients who received chemotherapy, those with larger tumors had worse prognosis, particularly in the distant metastasis stage, showing a 9.8% reduction in 5-year OS. These findings were consistently validated using our institutional dataset.
conclusionLarger tumor size is associated with higher metastatic risk and unfavorable prognosis in WT. This highlights its potential value as a practical supplementary indicator for risk stratification and clinical decision-making, particularly in resource-limited settings.
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.