ReviewKorean journal of urology2015
New and contemporary markers of prognosis in nonmuscle invasive urothelial cancer.
Review in Korean journal of urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The therapeutic and prognostic implications of molecular biomarkers in urothelial carcinoma.Translational cancer research · 2020Review
- Total Fluid Intake and the Risk of Recurrence in Patients With Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Prospective Cohort Study.Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2018Article
- Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of recurrence in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a prospective cohort study.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2018Article
- Aberrant methylated key genes of methyl group metabolism within the molecular etiology of urothelial carcinogenesis.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Potential role of miR-139-5p in cancer diagnosis, prognosis and therapy.Oncology letters · 2017Article
- High expression of constitutive photomorphogenic 1 (COP1) is associated with poor prognosis in bladder cancer.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nonmuscle invasive (NMI) urothelial cancer (UC) is associated with varied biological potential. It is characterized by frequent recurrence and progression, which thus worsens the oncological outcome. Nearly three-quarters of NMI UCs recur within 5 years, whereas half can progress during follow-up. Progression is particularly seen in T1 and carcinoma in situ (CIS). Undoubtedly, NMI UC is one of the most expensive cancers to manage. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk calculator is a commonly used tool for assessing the recurrence and progression potential of a newly diagnosed cancer. The parameters used in the assessment are tumor size and number, pathological stage and grade of the cancer, presence of CIS, and prior recurrence rate. The main advantages of the EORTC tool are its ease of use and the lack of need to run expensive molecular tests. However, reproducibility of pathologic stage and grade is modest, which is a concern to clinicians. Molecular markers have potential for predicting the clinical outcome of NMI UC, given that clinico-pathologic variables are not sufficient for prediction of prognosis in an individual. Significant work has been done in the past 2 decades in understanding the molecular biology of bladder cancer; however, the translational value of this knowledge remains poor. The role for molecular markers in predicting recurrence seems limited because multifocal disease and incomplete treatment are probably more important for recurrence than the molecular features of a resected tumor. Urinary markers have very limited value in prognostication of bladder cancer and are used (mainly as an adjunct to cytology) for detection and surveillance of urothelial cell cancer recurrence. Prediction of progression with molecular markers holds considerable promise. Nevertheless, the contemporary value of molecular markers over clinico-pathologic indexes is limited.
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.