ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
Micropapillary variant of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a SEER-based propensity score-matched analysis of clinicopathological features and survival outcomes.
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. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo utilize a population-based database to compare the clinical-pathological characteristics and survival results of the micropapillary variant of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) with those of conventional papillary UTUC.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, SEER data were used for patients diagnosed with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) between 2000 and 2022. After applying predefined exclusion criteria, a total of 10,096 patients were included in the study, comprising 10,037 with conventional papillary UTUC and 59 with the micropapillary variant of UTUC. Clinical and pathological characteristics and survival results were compared among the groups. Cancer-specific and overall survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. To reduce baseline imbalance, a 1:4 propensity score matching was performed using two separate models.
resultsPatients with micropapillary variant UTUC had higher rates of high-grade tumors and advanced-stage disease than those with conventional papillary UTUC. In the unmatched cohort, cancer-specific survival was significantly worse in the micropapillary group, whereas overall survival did not differ significantly. In the matched analysis including stage and grade, no significant difference was observed in either outcome. However, when stage and grade were excluded from the matching model, cancer-specific survival remained significantly worse in the micropapillary group. In multivariable Cox analyses, micropapillary histology was not an independent predictor of survival.
conclusionsMicropapillary UTUC is associated with higher grade, more advanced stage, and a more aggressive clinical presentation than conventional papillary UTUC. Although its association with survival was attenuated after matching or adjustment for stage and grade, these variables may represent part of the biological expression of the micropapillary subtype. Therefore, the independent and total prognostic effects of micropapillary histology cannot be clearly separated using registry-based observational data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42479370What 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.