ArticleThe Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences2013
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival rate in advanced urothelial carcinoma.
Article in The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Upper Tract versus Lower Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Current urology · 2019Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radical surgery (RS) with adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) or radiotherapy has been conventionally used for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (AUC). Recent research has indicated that systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) with RS yields better outcomes than RS alone for patients with locally advanced bladder cancer. However, there are no reports indicating whether NC or AC would be beneficial for patients with AUC. The present study compared the survival rate for AUC patients receiving NC or AC. A retrospective analysis was conducted using data for 64 patients with AUC who underwent RS and systemic chemotherapy at our institution between March 2002 and March 2011. Of the 64 patients, 30 received NC before RS and 34 received RS followed by systemic AC. Pathologic stages (p=0.002), grades (p=0.018) and lymphovascular invasion (p=0.047) were significantly lower in the patients who received NC first than in those who received RC first. Furthermore, analysis of the surgical specimens revealed that 26.7% of patients who received NC before RS had complete remission. There were no significant differences in demographic data, surgical complications, and chemotoxicity between the two patient groups. The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients who received initial NC were significantly better than those of patients who received initial RC (p=0.002 and 0.018, respectively). Our results indicate that NC administration before RS significantly improved the PFS and OS of AUC patients, without increasing surgical complications and chemotoxicity. Further prospectively controlled trials need to be conducted to confirm the effectiveness of NC for AUC patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.