ReviewNature reviews. Urology2018
A practical guide to bladder cancer pathology.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Glycomics and Glycoproteomics Reveal Distinct Oligomannose Carriers Across Bladder Cancer Stages.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Identification and validation of a 9-RBPs-related gene signature associated with prognosis and immune infiltration in bladder cancer based on bioinformatics analysis and machine learning.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- New Bladder Preservation Strategies in Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Review
- Development and Validation of a Competitive Risk Model in Elderly Patients with Transitional Cell Bladder Carcinoma.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Advances in Therapy for Urothelial and Non-Urothelial Subtype Histologies of Advanced Bladder Cancer: From Etiology to Current Development.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Urine-based SERS and multivariate statistical analysis for identification of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive bladder cancer.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Contemporary Molecular Markers for Predicting Systemic Treatment Response in Urothelial Bladder Cancer: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Bladder Cancer and Artificial Intelligence: Emerging Applications.The Urologic clinics of North America · 2024Review
- A stacking ensemble system for identifying the presence of histological variants in bladder carcinoma: a multicenter study.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Urine biomarkers in bladder cancer - current status and future perspectives.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023Review
- Precise diagnosis and treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer - A clinical perspective.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Survival nomogram for high-grade bladder cancer patients after surgery based on the SEER database and external validation cohort.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- An update on computational pathology tools for genitourinary pathology practice: A review paper from the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS).Journal of pathology informatics · 2023Review
- Characterizing molecular subtypes of high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer in African American patients.Urologic oncology · 2022Article
- Downregulation of mMolecular oncology · 2022Article
- Bladder cancer prognosis using deep neural networks and histopathology images.Journal of pathology informatics · 2022Article
- The Clinical Impact of Tumor Grade Heterogeneity in Non-muscle-invasive Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder.Medeniyet medical journal · 2021Article
- Integrative Transcriptome Profiling RevealsCancers · 2021Article
- Review
- Estimated Costs and Long-term Outcomes of Patients With High-Risk Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Treated With Bacillus Calmette-Guérin in the Veterans Affairs Health System.JAMA network open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pathological assessment of bladder cancer is becoming an increasingly complex task owing to the growing availability of molecular data for different histological subtypes and the appreciation of their importance in determining outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Urologists are aware of the need to closely collaborate with pathologists, and comprehensive sharing of information is crucial to achieve optimal patient management. Numerous steps towards this goal have been made during the past years. Important advances in the assessment and reporting of grading and staging, especially substaging of pT1 urothelial carcinomas, have been made. As part of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), an international expert group has suggested worldwide reporting standards for urothelial lesions. Nevertheless, several issues remain unresolved, for example, regarding the reporting of heterogeneous lesions and substaging as well as the gross handling and the reporting for lymphadenectomy specimens. During the past few years, major insights have been gained into the molecular changes that occur during bladder cancer development, but a consensus on how to integrate these data into daily practice has not been achieved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29384523What 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.