ArticleCancers2026
Toronto Staging Guidelines for Wilms Tumour: The Meeting Point Between Clinicians and Epidemiologists-Results of the BENCHISTA-ITA Project.
Article in Cancers, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDespite overall excellent outcomes for Wilms tumour, regional variations in stage at diagnosis and care pathways remain a concern across Europe. We evaluated stage distribution, three-year survival, and treatment patterns in Italy, considering hospital care as a proxy for healthcare capacity and migration.
methodsData were obtained from 26 population-based cancer registries (PBCRs), covering 148 patients (ages 0-14) diagnosed between 2013 and 2017, representing about 80% of the Italian population. Stage was classified according to the Toronto guidelines. Information on treatment and diagnosed/treating hospitals was collected. Stage at diagnosis was further refined using probabilistic linkage with the clinical registry 1.01 Model. Overall survival, defined as all-cause mortality, was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.
resultsMost patients presented with localized disease (77%), 32% Stage I, while 19% were Stage IV. Three-year survival analysis showed significant differences between stages, ranging from 98% in patients with Stage I to 78% in the ones with Stage IV. No significant disparity across the Italian regions was observed in stage distribution or survival. Diagnoses and treatments were mostly (>90%) centralized in the same region for patients residing in the Centre or North of Italy. However, the cross-regional health migration from the South was of about 30% for diagnosis and larger for treatments.
conclusionsThis study shows that standardized staging improves data comparability and highlights challenges in managing metastatic cases and regional care pathways. The results support the use of clinical and PBCR information to interpret survival patterns and guide improvements in paediatric oncology care.
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.