Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27500196›Full record

ReviewBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2016

The Future of Intravesical Drug Delivery for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.

Laura Douglass, Mark Schoenberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Enzymatic microbubble robots.Nature nanotechnology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Preclinical Evaluation of Intravesical Cisplatin Nanoparticles for Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2017
    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

2 authors.

Laura DouglassDepartment of Urology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine , Bronx, NY, USA.
Mark SchoenbergDepartment of Urology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine , Bronx, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite being the fifth most common cancer in the United States, minimal progress has been made in the treatment of bladder cancer in over a decade. Intravesical instillation of Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) for the treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) has been in use for over 30 years and remains the standard treatment in cases of intermediate and high risk disease. Despite the relative success of intravesical BCG, unmet needs in the treatment of NMIBC persist. These challenges include disease recurrence and progression even with treatment with BCG, as well as issues regarding its availability and patient tolerability. The inherent properties of the bladder pose the biggest obstacle to developing effective intravesical treatments for NMIBC. Current research is now focusing on methods to improve the delivery of intravesical therapies. The objective of this review is to discuss novel intravesical drug delivery systems and how they are addressing these challenges in the treatment of NMIBC.

Indexed as

Bladder cancerdrug delivery deviceshydrogelsintravesical therapynanocarriers

Identifiers

PMID27500196
PMCPMC4969694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.