Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21228821›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2011

Contemporary management of low-risk bladder cancer.

Johannes Falke, J Alfred Witjes

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The role of WNT signalling in urothelial cell carcinoma.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2015
    Article
  8. Synthetic miRNA sponges driven by mutant hTERT promoter selectively inhibit the progression of bladder cancer.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2015
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Johannes FalkeRadboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Department of Urology (659), PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands. f.witjes@uro.umcn.nl
J Alfred Witjes
Radboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bladder cancer comprises a heterogeneous group of tumors, the majority of which are non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) at initial presentation. Low-risk bladder cancer--defined as pTa low-grade papillary tumors--is the type of NMIBC with the most favorable oncologic outcome. Although the risk of progression is less than 1% in 5 years, almost 15% will recur after 1 year, and 32% after 5 years. A complete transurethral resection, followed by an immediate single postoperative instillation of chemotherapy will reduce the risk of recurrence for the first 2 years. Follow-up cystoscopy is required to detect recurrence; in the vast majority of cases the recurrent tumor is of the same stage and grade as the primary tumor. The first follow-up visit, 3 months after surgery, is the most important in predicting risk of recurrence for the future. Recent developments in profiling urine and cancer tissue make it possible to better predict risk of progression and recurrence. In the future this profiling will play an important role in the timing and the choice of treatment, as well as guiding follow-up procedures.

Indexed as

Combined Modality TherapyHumansRisk FactorsUrinary Bladder Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID21228821
OpenAlexW1991426098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.