ReviewAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Prognosis Comparison Between Synchronous and Metachronous Metastasis of Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.
Review in Annals of surgical 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRenal cell carcinoma (RCC), a common urologic malignancy, is associated with a poor prognosis in metastatic settings. Nevertheless, the prognostic significance of metastatic timing remains inadequately characterized.
methodsA comprehensive systematic search was conducted across the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases through October 2025 to identify relevant studies. Data extraction focused on evaluating the prognostic impact of metastatic timing on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to treatment failure (TTF). Individual patient-level OS data were reconstructed where necessary. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 18, with reconstructed patient-level data analyzed in R 4.4.2.
resultsNine studies showed superior OS in metachronous metastasis (relative risk [RR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.31; p < 0.05). The re-analyzed data still indicated that patients with metachronous metastasis have a better OS (HR, 1.959; 95% CI, 1.581-2.428; p < 0.001). This survival advantage persisted in both targeted-therapy (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.11-1.18; p < 0.05) and immunotherapy (RR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.53-2.39; p < 0.05) cohorts. However, no significant difference in OS was observed in the brain metastasis (BM) subgroup. The post-reconstruction analysis remained consistent with the original result. Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in PFS and TTF between the two groups.
conclusionSynchronous metastasis independently predicts poorer OS for patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC), particularly those under targeted therapy or immunotherapy. Although metastatic timing emerges as a clinically significant prognostic biomarker in mRCC, these findings require additional validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42722945What 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.