Talk:Wilms' tumor

'Normal'

what s normal child? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.77.241 (talk) 19:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I've

I've moved this from Wilms tumor, as the spelling with the apostroph is the more correct one. Jfdwolff 14:48, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Nephroblastoma vs. Wilms?

Which has precedence-- medical or common?

Pubmed (hits)

• "Wilms" 5784
• nephroblastoma 6851

Google (hits)

• "Wilms tumor" 150,000
• nephroblastoma 49,100

I'm not fan of eponyms and think nephroblastoma is a better term 'cause it describes the condition -- nephro - kidney, blastoma - tumor arising from embryonic tissue. Any thoughts on this... rules? Nephron 23:35, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Nephroblastoma vs. Wilms? - Reply

"Which has precedence - medical or common?"

Good point, and well argued. However, why not have a quick think about this: who is wikipedia directed at - medical professionals, or the public as whole (medical or not). Your evidence from google functions as a double edged sword, while weakening your arguement it strengthens my own, by illustrating that the term "Wilms' tumor" permits greater accessibility than 'nephroblastoma'.

We don't want to impose rules on Wikipedia that would stiffle accessiblity to the majority. Wouldn't that essentially oppose the ethos of "The Free Encyclopedia"?

Such rules would be counterproductive.

Wilms' vs. Wilms

My impression was that the apostrophe is not needed or standard. If others agree, please edit the article appropriately.

The form with the apostrophe is the original form. It's "Wilms' tumor". The other eponyms associated with Max Wilms are "Wilms' amputation", "Wilms' cones", "WIlms' symptom", and "Wilms' operation". See Who named it?. There has been a trend toward eliminating possessive eponyms (thus Down's syndrome, the original form, is often "Down syndrome" today, and this is reflected in dictionaries; however, while Merriam Webster's Collegiate has entries for both "Down syndrome" and "Down's syndrome", it has an entry only for "Wilms' tumor", and not "Wilms tumor", so the former, with the apostrophe, is still the standard spelling. - Nunh-huh 10:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I had it Wow this was a journey but I survived and am ALIVE. I was ten.

Wilms' vs. Wilms

This disease does not need an appostrophe to show ownership as it is named after the scientist who discovered it, his last name was Wilms. So, it is a Wilms tumor.

Alois Alzheimer claimed no "ownership" of Alzheimer's disease, either, yet that's how it's known. And exactly for the same reason — that is, having been first described by — Wilms' tumor also does have the apostrophe in the name. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

FIXED Eponym

To say 'it is eponymously named after' is a truism! It would be better to say 'it is named after...' or 'it is eponymous to...'

Fixed. --Una Smith (talk) 18:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

FIXED Adult Onset

The at risk group is larger than children. My father died of it at age 49. My half-brother has been on dialysis since his 40s.

Fixed. --Una Smith (talk) 18:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Benign or malignant

I have made several edits to the article to address questions here, but there is still more to do. At present the article is inconsistent re whether Wilms' tumor is always a malignant cancer, or sometimes benign. Would someone care to research this question and clean up the article? --Una Smith (talk) 18:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Assessment

About five hundred new cases each year in the U.S. is "extremely rare" and therefore does not justify an importance rating of "high". WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Constellations of Conditions

Wilms is also present in other syndromes and medical constellations, such as WAGR, Denys-Drash...I am adding them to the See Also. Any objections?Shigaon (talk) 05:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

CT scan is of right kidney

The CT scan on this page shows a tumor in the right kidney, not the left kidney (as stated before). CT scans are read in cross-sectional slices as if the patient were lying on a bed, feet facing you; therefore, the left side of the image corresponds to the patient's right side. This orientation is also consistent with the position of the aorta and aortic arch, liver, et cetera in this particular scan. I have edited the page accordingly. --shrimppesto (talk) 06:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way to slow down the CT scan video. It is tedious having to press stop and play so many times to jsut slow it down. AriaNo11 (talk) 17:18, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Survival Rates

Direct citation and in text references necessary for survival rates. Particularly because a 4 year survival rate is listed for stage V. Rare at best. 143.111.239.73 (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Percentage numbers for stages

If you add them up, you get 104%. How come? -The T-Man (talk) 12:52, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Link removed - not useful

I reverted the addition of the "See Also" link to article Sara Shamsavari - the subject's only connection is that she has Wilms' tumour. I don't think it adds anything to list people with a condition. If others think otherwise, there should be a separate list or some annotation. DavidCh0 (talk) 11:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Queen's University Student Editing Initiative

Hello, we are a group of medical students from Queen's University. We are working to improve this article over the next month and will be posting or planned changes on this talk page. We look forward to working with the existing Wikipedia medical editing community to improve this article and share evidence. We welcome feedback and suggestions as we learn to edit. Thank you. Patguy202 (talk) 18:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

We have compiled a list of suggestions to improve this article and would appreciate community feedback before we proceed with these edits. Here is a list of our suggestions:

1. We propose to add the following citations to the Introduction sections: Approximately 650 cases are diagnosed in the U.S. annually. The majority of cases occur in otherwise normal children; however, a minority of children with Wilms tumor have an associated congenital syndrome.

This looks good, thanks. Can you find simplier way to describe associated congenital syndrome or wikilinks the term? These articles are meant to be understood by someone who does not have a medical background.

Please add your citation with the PMID tool. If you need help please see MEDHOW or I am happy to help you figure it out. JenOttawa (talk) 01:08, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

2. We propose to add the following introductory content to the Pathogenesis section: Wilms Tumor has many causes, which can broadly be categorized as syndromic and non-syndromic. Syndromic causes of Wilms Tumor occur as a result of alterations to genes such as the Wilms Tumor 1 (WT1) or Wilms Tumor 2 (WT2) genes, and the tumor presents with a constellation of other signs and symptoms. Non-syndromic Wilms Tumor is not associated with other symptoms or pathologies.

This looks good. Can you add your reference with the PMID/DOI tool? This will improve the formatting.

Try to use lay language. Can you try finding a replacement for constellation

See above comment re adding with the PMID/DOI/URL tool. See MEDHOW for info or the class slides. You can practice in your sandbox. JenOttawa (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

3. We propose to add the following content to the Pathogenesis section pertaining to the role of nephrogenic rests in the development of the tumor: Many, but not all, cases of Wilms Tumor develop from nephrogenic rests, which are fragments of tissue in or around the kidney that develop before birth and become cancerous after birth. In particular, cases of bilateral Wilms Tumor, as well as cases of Wilms Tumor derived from certain genetic syndromes such as Denys-Drash syndrome, are strongly associated with nephrogenic rests.

Thanks for the suggestion. Can you find Wikilinks for any of these terms? JenOttawa (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

4. We propose to add the following content to the Diagnosis section: The majority of patients with Wilms’ tumor present with an asymptotic abdominal mass which is noticed by a family member or healthcare professional. Renal tumors can also be found during routine screening in children who have known predisposing clinical syndromes. The diagnostic process includes taking a medical history, a physical exam, and a series of tests including blood, urine, and imaging tests.

Please replace “patient” with “people” as per WP:MEDMOS JenOttawa (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Once Wilms’ tumor is suspected, an ultrasound scan is usually done first to confirm the presence of an intrarenal mass. A computed tomography scan or MRI scan can also be used for more detailed imaging. Finally, the diagnosis of Wilms’ tumor is confirmed by a tissue sample. In most cases, a biopsy is not done first because there is a risk of cancer cells spreading during the procedure. Hence, nephrectomy (in North America) or chemotherapy followed by nephrectomy (in Europe) is performed instead. A definitive diagnosis is obtained after examining the nephrectomy specimen.

Can you find some Wikilinks to add? This looks good so far.JenOttawa (talk)

Please add your reference with the PMID tool to properly format it.

5. We propose to expand the Epidemiology Section and add context with the introduction sentence: Wilms tumor is the most common malignant renal tumor in children. There are a number of rare genetic syndromes that have been linked to an increased risk of developing Wilms Tumor..

Please replace the use of patients with “people” as per Wikipedia’s Manual of style.

I re. Added this reference using the PMID. Please adjust others.

JenOttawa (talk) 01:25, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Syndrome Name	Associated Genetic Variant	Risk for Wilms tumor	Description of Syndrome
WAGR syndrome (Wilms tumor, aniridia, genital anomalies, retardation)	Gene deletion that includes both WT1 and PAX6	45-60%	Characterized by Wilms tumor, aniridia (absence of iris), hemihypertrophy (one side of body larger other), genitourinary abnormalities, ambiguous genitalia, intellectual disability. (Dome, 2016)
Denys-Drash syndrome (DDS)	WT1 (exon 8 and 9)	74%	Characterized by kidney diseases since birth leading to early-onset kidney failure, ambiguous genitalia (intersex disorders). (Dome, 2016)
Beckwith-Wiedemann Syndrome	Abnormal regulation of chromosome 11p15.5	7%	Characterized by macrosmia (large birth size), macroglossia (large tongue) hemihypertrophy (one side of body larger than other), other tumors in body, omphalocele (open abdominal wall) and visceromegaly (enlargement of organs inside abdomen). (Dome, 2016)

Thanks for sharing this table. I have a few notes:

• Please add the citations using the PMID tool. Tables are a little harder to format, so if you need help please do not hesitate to let me know.
• There are quite a few terms/genes in the table that a Wikilink can be added to.

Thanks again!JenOttawa (talk) 01:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

6. We propose to remove: Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome, Denys-Drash syndrome, W, and WAGR syndrome from the see also section as per the Wikipedia manual of style as this section should be avoided when possible and they have been referenced about.

We welcome any feedback or other suggestions from the community. Thank you! Patguy202 (talk) 19:50, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

References

'Notable cases'?

Is the section 'Notable cases' really needed; what value does it add? Firstly, I find it vaguely inappropriate, in a general sense. More to the point, it's also nonsensical, in that this disease almost always affects (young) children, and very few children can be 'notable' yet due to their age, other than by association (celebrity parent, etc.). And while it is inarguably tragic that some famous(ish) person's child has had Wilms' tumour, not to mention perhaps died of it, I fail to see how that makes either the child or the parent 'notable' in this context. And that's to say nothing of how any such listing could only ever be incomplete; case in point: there is currently only one case mentioned. TL;DR = I think this section falls foul of WP:NOTMEMORIAL and should be removed. Thoughts? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:53, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Removed the section, since nobody has objected. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:57, 17 January 2021 (UTC)