ArticlePloS one2019
A multi-institutional study of bladder-preserving therapy for stage II-IV bladder cancer: A Korean Radiation Oncology Group Study (KROG 14-16).
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough radical cystectomy is a standard treatment in muscle-invasive bladder cancer, bladder preservation therapy including transurethral resection of bladder tumor, radiotherapy, and concurrent chemotherapy has been widely adopted, recently. This retrospective analysis was performed to evaluate the survival rates and prognostic factors related to treatment outcomes following bladder-preserving therapy including radiotherapy (RT) in bladder cancer with a curative intent. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a multi-institutional retrospective study of 152 patients with stage II-IV bladder cancer treated with curative RT between 2000 and 2010. There were 72 patients in stage II, 49 in stage III, and 31 in stage IV. Ninety-seven patients were treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy and fifty-five with RT alone. Radiation was delivered to the pelvis (median 63 Gy), mainly with cisplatin. The median follow-up time was 35.5 months.
resultsSixty-nine patients (45.4%) showed a complete response to RT. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 45.8%, the 5-year cause-specific survival (CSS) rate was 48.9%, and the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 20.8%. Univariate analysis revealed significant differences in the following factors according to the survival rates: patient age, initial hemoglobin level, clinical T stage, clinical N stage, clinical stage group, tumor response to RT, hydronephrosis, and concurrent chemotherapy. Multivariate analysis also revealed a significant difference in patient age (p = 0.003 in OS, p<0.017 in CSS) and tumor response to RT (p = 0.002 in OS, p<0.001 in CSS). Concurrent chemotherapy was significantly different in the DFS rates (p = 0.046).
conclusionsThe survival rates reported herein are comparable to those from other studies, and tumor response and concurrent chemoradiotherapy were significant prognostic factors for better survival rates. Further randomized studies are needed to elucidate the impact of RT in bladder cancer.
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.