Bacic (2020)

Renal cell carcinoma

Oncology • Other Data • US

Study Metrics
Total Sample 67388
Treatment Group 58815
Control Group 8573
Covariates 19
PICO Comparisons 1
Quality Indicators
Transparency High
DAG Usage No
QBA Performed No

Study Information

First Author: Bacic
Publication Year: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.01.039
Preprint: No preprint

Institution & Funding

Institution Type: Academic
Institutions: Advance-CTR, Brown University, Rhode Island Hospital, Mayo Clinic, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Funding: Declared: Public
Funding Institutions: The project described was supported by Institutional Development Award Number U54GM115677 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health, which funds Advance Clinical and Translational Research (Advance-CTR). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Study Context

Disease: Renal cell carcinoma
Disease Category: Oncology
Data Type: Other
Number of Data Sources: 1
Geography: US
Eligible Sample: 67388.0
Number of Treatments: 2

Analytical Methods

Missing Data Method: Complete case
Matching Method: PS matching
Analysis Method: Cox PH

Quality Methods

Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) Not Used
Quantitative Bias Analysis (QBA) Not Performed

Target Trial Information

Target Trial Name: EORTC 30881
Target Trial DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.09.052

TTE vs RCT Comparisons

Detailed comparison between Target Trial Emulation results and corresponding Randomized Controlled Trial outcomes.

Overall survival
EORTC 30881
HR Efficacy
Population

patients with cT1-3cN0cM0 renal cell carcinoma

Intervention

radical nephrectomy with lymph node dissection

Comparison

radical nephrectomy alone

Outcome

Overall survival

RCT Result

1.02

95% CI: [0.80, 1.29]


vs
TTE Result

1.13

95% CI: [1.07, 1.20]

Concordance Assessment
Confidence Interval Overlap: Yes
CIs overlap, suggesting concordance
Direction Agreement: Same Direction
Both point to similar conclusion

Transparency Indicators

Protocol Registration Available
Data Sharing Not Available
Code Sharing Not Available
Overall Transparency Score:
High Transparency - This study meets good transparency standards.

Conflicts & Funding

Conflicts of Interest: Declared: None
Funding Source: Declared: Public
Funding Institutions: The project described was supported by Institutional Development Award Number U54GM115677 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health, which funds Advance Clinical and Translational Research (Advance-CTR). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.