Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25318881›Full record

SynthesisJournal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Medical sciences = Hua zhong ke ji da xue xue bao. Yi xue Ying De wen ban = Huazhong keji daxue xuebao. Yixue Yingdewen ban2014

Long-term versus short-term introvesical chemotherapy in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published results of randomized clinical trials.

Teng Li, Yi Xing, Shu-Cheng Liu, Xiao-Min Han, Wen-Cheng Li, Min Chen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Medical sciences = Hua zhong ke ji da xue xue bao. Yi xue Ying De wen ban = Huazhong keji daxue xuebao. Yixue Yingdewen ban, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Teng LiDepartment of Urology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Yi XingDepartment of Ophthalmology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Shu-Cheng LiuDepartment of Urology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Xiao-Min HanDepartment of Urology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Wen-Cheng LiDepartment of Urology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Min ChenDepartment of Urology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China. Tjmchen@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to assess the effect of long-term versus short-term intravesical chemotherapy in preventing the recurrence of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, we searched several databases with words as mesh terms and free text words to find all eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for the comparison of the two strategies of instillation durations. "Observed-Expected events research (O-E)" and "Variance (V)" for calculating hazard ratio (HR) were used in Revman 5.2 software recommended by Cochrane Collabration for data analysis. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis were selected to minish heterogeneity. GRADEpro 3.6 profile recommended by Cochrane Collabration was employed for quality assessment of analyses. Finally, 13 eligible RCTs with 4216 patients were included in this review and 16 comparisons from 13 trials were involved for analysis. The pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between long-term and short-term duration [HR=0.99, 95% CI (0.89, 1.11), P=0.89]. Within the subgroup analysis, patients benefited from long-term instillations with a start regimen of one immediate instillation [HR=0.83, 95% CI (0.69, 1.00), P=0.05]. But patients were not suitable to receive long-term instillations with epirubicin (EPI) [HR=1.01, 95% CI (0.91, 1.13), P=0.78]. The progression rate was not reduced after long-term instillations [HR=0.96, 95% CI (0.66, 1.39), P=0.82]. From our results, patients should not receive introvesical chemotherapy more than half a year. In contrast, patients with one immediate instillation are preferred to have a long-term duration at least one year. Long-term instillations can not reduce the progression rate.

Indexed as

Administration, IntravesicalAntibiotics, AntineoplasticDrug TherapyEpirubicinNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAntibiotics, AntineoplasticEpirubicin

Identifiers

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.