Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27247631›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology2016

Molecular substratification of bladder cancer: moving towards individualized patient management.

Anirban P Mitra

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Similar genetic profile in early and late stage urothelial tract cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. [Molecular tumor board-urothelial cancer].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anirban P MitraInstitute of Urology, University of Southern California, 1441 Eastlake Avenue, Suite 7416, MC 9178, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
University of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite advances in surgical techniques, perioperative therapies and postoperative management, outcomes for patients with bladder cancer have largely remained unchanged. Current management of bladder cancer still relies on pathologic staging that does not always reflect the risk for an individual patient. Studies assessing molecular alterations in individual tumors are offering insights into the myriad of cellular pathways that are deregulated in bladder tumorigenesis and progression. Alterations in pathways involved in cell-cycle regulation, apoptosis, cell signaling, angiogenesis and tumor-cell invasion have been shown to influence disease behavior. High-throughput assays are now allowing multiplexed assessment of biomarker alterations, thereby enabling characterization of novel molecular subtypes of bladder cancer. Such approaches have also been used for discovery and validation of robust prognostic molecular signatures. The future of bladder cancer management will rely on the use of validated multimarker panels for risk stratification, optimal surgical management, and theranostic strategies to identify and target specific alterations in individual tumors.

Indexed as

expression profilingimmunohistochemistrymolecular subtypingmultimarker analysisprognosisrisk stratificationurinary bladder neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID27247631
PMCPMC4872193
OpenAlexW2316104183

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.