MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408341294 · doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000001276

The role of surgical resection of the primary tumor in metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4408341294 on OpenAlexaff
Mehdi Kardoust Parizi, Nirmish Singla, Morgan Rouprêt, Vitaly Margulis, Akihiro Matsukawa, Ichiro Tsuboi, R. J. Schulz, Pierre I. Karakiewicz, Jeremy Yuen‐Chun Teoh, Francesco Soria, Shahrokh F Shariat

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Urology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioPrimary tumorCochrane LibraryMeta-analysisOncologyLymph nodeConfidence intervalSubgroup analysisSystematic reviewInternal medicineStage (stratigraphy)MetastasisCancerDatabaseSurgeryMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate the role of extirpative surgery for the primary tumor in metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (mUTUC). RECENT FINDINGS: The PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched on July 2024 to identify relevant studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review (PRISMA) statement. Studies were eligible for analysis if they compared oncologic outcomes between mUTUC patients who underwent surgical resection of the primary tumor and patients who did not. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using multivariate logistic regression analyses. We identified 2686 reports, of which 11 articles comprising 12 833 records were selected for this systematic review. Eight and three studies used Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) and National Cancer Database (NCDB) databases, respectively. Surgical resection of the primary tumor was significantly associated with better CSS and OS in patients with mUTUC. Among the 5353 mUTUC patients included in our meta-analysis, radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) was independently associated with better OS with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.72, P < 0.05]. Subgroup analyses of studies restricted to mUTUC patients with distant lymph node metastasis ( n = 1372) revealed RNU to be independently associated with better OS with pooled HR: 0.44 (95% CI 0.28-0.67, P < 0.05) together with systemic chemotherapy, primary tumor site in the ureter, lower T stage, and no locoregional lymph node involvement. SUMMARY: Surgical resection of the primary tumor offers oncologic survival benefits in select patients with mUTUC. However, in the absence of data from prospective randomized studies, it is essential to evaluate each patient individually as part of a collaborative multidisciplinary shared decision working with the patient.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.029
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in UrologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207