ArticleBritish journal of cancer1996
Resection of residual retroperitoneal masses in testicular cancer: evaluation and improvement of selection criteria. The ReHiT study group. Re-analysis of histology in testicular cancer.
Article in British journal of cancer, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Pleural LDH as a prognostic marker in adenocarcinoma lung with malignant pleural effusion.Medicine · 2016Article
- Identifying Malignant Pleural Effusion by A Cancer Ratio (Serum LDH: Pleural Fluid ADA Ratio).Lung · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Residual retroperitoneal masses may remain after chemotherapy for metastatic non-seminomatous testicular cancer, which harbour residual tumour or totally benign tissue (necrosis/fibrosis). These residual masses may be effectively removed by a surgical resection. We evaluated current selection criteria and tried to develop alternative criteria in a data set of 544 patients, who had retroperitoneal lymph node dissection of residual masses. Six resection policies were identified from the literature. Two alternative policies were developed with logistic regression analysis. Evaluation of the policies focused on the true-positive rate (resection in case of tumour), and the false-positive rate (resection in case of necrosis). It appeared that most current policies use the size of the residual mass (> or = 10 mm or > or = 20 mm) as the predominant selection criterion. This resulted in high true-positive rates (most > 90%), but false-positive rates between 37% and 87%. The alternative policies included five well-known predictors of necrosis in addition to residual mass size (primary tumour histology, prechemotherapy levels of the three tumour markers alphafetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and mass shrinkage during chemotherapy). This strategy resulted in improved true- and false-positive rates, even when categories of the predictors were simplified for practical application. We conclude that a simple statistical model, based on a limited number of patient characteristics, provides better guidelines for patient selection than those currently used in clinical practice.
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.