Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29480348›Full record

ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2018

Impact of bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy of upper urinary tract carcinoma in situ: comparison of oncological outcomes with radical nephroureterectomy.

Hirotaka Horiguchi, Takahiro Yoneyama, Shingo Hatakeyama, Noriko Tokui, Tendo Sato, Naoki Fujita, Hayato Yamamoto, Yuki Tobisawa, Tohru Yoneyama, Yasuhiro Hashimoto and 5 more

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hirotaka HoriguchiDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Takahiro YoneyamaDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Shingo HatakeyamaDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan. shingoh@hirosaki-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0026-4079
Noriko TokuiDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Tendo SatoDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Naoki FujitaDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Hayato YamamotoDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Yuki TobisawaDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Tohru YoneyamaDepartment of Advanced Transplant and Regenerative Medicine, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan.
Yasuhiro HashimotoDepartment of Advanced Transplant and Regenerative Medicine, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan.
Takuya KoieDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Kazuaki YoshikawaDepartment of Urology, Mutsu General Hospital, Mutsu, Japan.
Satoshi NaritaDepartment of Urology, Odate General Hospital, Odate, Japan.
Toshiaki KawaguchiDepartment of Urology, Aomori Prefectural Central Hospital, Aomori, Japan.
Chikara OhyamaDepartment of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, 5 Zaifu-chou, Hirosaki, 036-8562, Japan.
Hirosaki University · JPAomori Prefectural Central Hospital · JP

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 15H02563Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 15K15579Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 17K11118Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 17K11119Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 17K16768Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 17K16770Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 17K16771
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical benefits of bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) therapy for the management of upper urinary tract carcinoma in situ (CIS) remain unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of BCG therapy for upper urinary tract CIS with those of radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Of 490 patients with upper urinary tract carcinoma, we retrospectively reviewed the post-treatment course of 58 patients with upper urinary tract CIS who underwent either RNU (RNU group) or BCG therapy (BCG group). Efficacy and safety were compared between the RNU and BCG groups. Inverse probability treatment-weighted (IPTW)-adjusted multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to identify the influence of BCG therapy on prognosis. The RNU and BCG groups included 20 and 38 patients, respectively. No significant difference was found in patients' background, including age, sex, and performance status, between the groups. The reason underlying the selection of BCG therapy was bilateral CIS of the upper urinary tract (50%), solitary kidney (26%), unwillingness to undergo RNU (13%), and ineligibility for surgery (11%). The cytology became negative in 30 (79%) out of 38 patients after a 6-week course of BCG therapy, and 17 (57%) out of 30 patients remained negative. BCG-related adverse events (AEs) were observed in 92% of patients. The most common AE was cystitis (76%), followed by fever (50%). No significant differences were found in the progression-free, cancer-specific, and overall survivals between the RNU and BCG groups. IPTW-adjusted multivariate analysis revealed that BCG therapy did not worsen the prognosis of these patients. The limitations of our study were its retrospective design and small sample size. In conclusion, BCG therapy for upper urinary tract CIS might be a useful alternative for patient ineligible for RNU under careful observation for AEs.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBCG VaccineCarcinoma in SituFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNephroureterectomyPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUrologic NeoplasmsBCG VaccineBacillus Calmette–GuérinCarcinoma in situNephroureterectomyOncological outcomeUpper tract urothelial carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID29480348
OpenAlexW2788468196

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.