Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating Overall Survival and Competing Risks of Death in Patients With Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma Using a Comprehensive Nomogram

Open access
Kutikov, Alexander, Egleston, Brian L., Wong, Yu-Ning, Uzzo, Robert G.·2010·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Many patients with localized node-negative renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are elderly with competing comorbidities. Their overall survival benefit after surgical treatment is unknown. We reviewed cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate the impact of kidney cancer versus competing causes of death in patients with localized RCC and develop a comprehensive nomogram to quantitate survival differences. Methods: We identified individuals with localized, surgically treated clear-cell, papillary, or chromophobe RCC in SEER (1988 through 2003). We used Fine and Gray competing risks proportional hazards regressions to predict 5-year probabilities of three competing mortality outcomes: kidney cancer death, other cancer death, and noncancer death. Results: We identified 30,801 cases of localized RCC (median age, 62 years; median tumor size, 4.5 cm). Five-year probabilities of kidney cancer death, other cancer death, and noncancer death were 4%, 7%, and 11%, respectively. Age was strongly predictive of mortality and most predictive of nonkidney cancer deaths (P < .001). Increasing tumor size was related to death from RCC and inversely related to noncancer deaths (P < .001). Racial differences in outcomes were most pronounced for nonkidney cancer deaths (P < .001). Men were more likely to die than women from all causes (P < .002). This nomogram integrates commonly available factors into a useful tool for comparing competing risks of death. Conclusion: Management of localized RCC must consider competing causes of mortality, particularly in elderly populations. Effective decision making requires treatment trade-off calculations. We present a tool to quantitate competing causes of mortality in patients with localized RCC.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2009.22.4816

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 292

Metadata

Authors
Kutikov, A., Egleston, B. L., Wong, Y.-N., & Uzzo, R. G.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2010-01-10
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
311-317
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2145113844
Cited by
292
References
1
FWCI
16.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluating Overall Survival and Competing Risks of Death in Patients With Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma Using a Comprehensive Nomogram. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2009.22.4816
The paper
Kutikov, A., Egleston, B. L., Wong, Y.-N., & Uzzo, R. G. (2010). Evaluating Overall Survival and Competing Risks of Death in Patients With Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma Using a Comprehensive Nomogram. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.22.4816

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.