001     128703
005     20240228145547.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1371/journal.pone.0184173
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:28934212
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a pmc:PMC5608215
|2 pmc
024 7 _ |a altmetric:70368916
|2 altmetric
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2017-04718
041 _ _ |a eng
082 _ _ |a 500
100 1 _ |a Wagener, Nina
|0 0000-0002-5029-8656
|b 0
245 _ _ |a Outcome of papillary versus clear cell renal cell carcinoma varies significantly in non-metastatic disease.
260 _ _ |a Lawrence, Kan.
|c 2017
|b PLoS
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1511259051_9899
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
520 _ _ |a Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) comprises a heterogenous group of tumors. Traditionally, papillary RCC (pRCC) is associated with a favorable outcome compared to clear cell RCC (ccRCC), while other series report equivalent or worse prognosis. In this paper we comparatively evaluate outcome of pRCC versus ccRCC in two large multi-institutional databases (cohort study), including distribution of pRCC subtypes 1 and 2. Retrospective data of 1,943 surgically treated pRCC patients from 17 European/ North American centers between 1984-2015 were compared to 5,600 ccRCC patients from a database comprising 11 European/ North American centers (1984-2011). Median follow-up was 64.6 months. Differences between pRCC, subtypes, and ccRCC were compared with t-tests, Chi^2-tests, and exact Fisher tests. Cancer-specific mortality was analyzed with cumulative incidence curves and Cox cause-specific hazard models. The robustness of our results was examined with sensitivity analyses. We present that cancer-specific mortality rates and variables as stage, lymph node, and distant metastasis differ significantly between groups. Furthermore, we demonstrate that patients with non-metastatic pRCC had a significantly better cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.76, p = 0.007), when compared to ccRCC. Additionally, pRCC type 2 versus ccRCC exhibited no difference in cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.9, p = 0.722), whereas pRCC type 1 versus ccRCC displayed a risk of death reduced by 69% (p = 0.044). Taken together, outcome of pRCC versus ccRCC varies significantly in non-metastatic disease. Furthermore, pRCC type 2 exhibited no difference in cancer-specific mortality, whereas pRCC type 1 displayed a significantly reduced risk of death. Consequently, there is urgent need to respect histopathological entities and their subtypes, when assigning follow-up or targeted therapy to RCC patients.
536 _ _ |a 313 - Cancer risk factors and prevention (POF3-313)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313
|c POF3-313
|f POF III
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
700 1 _ |a Edelmann, Dominic
|0 P:(DE-He78)92820b4867c955a04f642707ecf35b40
|b 1
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Benner, Axel
|0 P:(DE-He78)e15dfa1260625c69d6690a197392a994
|b 2
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Zigeuner, Richard
|b 3
700 1 _ |a Borgmann, Hendrik
|b 4
700 1 _ |a Wolff, Ingmar
|b 5
700 1 _ |a Krabbe, Laura M
|b 6
700 1 _ |a Musquera, Mireia
|b 7
700 1 _ |a Dell'Oglio, Paolo
|b 8
700 1 _ |a Capitanio, Umberto
|b 9
700 1 _ |a Klatte, Tobias
|b 10
700 1 _ |a Cindolo, Luca
|b 11
700 1 _ |a May, Matthias
|b 12
700 1 _ |a Brookman-May, Sabine D
|b 13
700 1 _ |a Urology, European Association of
|b 14
|e Collaboration Author
773 _ _ |a 10.1371/journal.pone.0184173
|g Vol. 12, no. 9, p. e0184173 -
|0 PERI:(DE-600)2267670-3
|n 9
|p e0184173 -
|t PLoS one
|v 12
|y 2017
|x 1932-6203
909 C O |o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:128703
|p VDB
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 1
|6 P:(DE-He78)92820b4867c955a04f642707ecf35b40
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 2
|6 P:(DE-He78)e15dfa1260625c69d6690a197392a994
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300
|v Cancer risk factors and prevention
|x 0
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
|b Gesundheit
914 1 _ |y 2017
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b PLOS ONE : 2015
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0310
|2 StatID
|b NCBI Molecular Biology Database
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ Seal
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ
915 _ _ |a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)
|0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV
|2 V:(DE-HGF)
|b DOAJ
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600
|2 StatID
|b Ebsco Academic Search
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b ASC
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Thomson Reuters Master Journal List
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1040
|2 StatID
|b Zoological Record
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1050
|2 StatID
|b BIOSIS Previews
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331
|k C060
|l Biostatistik
|x 0
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21