Trial reportUrologic oncology2020
Screening logs from a pilot randomized controlled trial of radical cystectomy versus chemoradiation therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
Trial report in Urologic oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A population-based analysis of patterns of care in patients with de novo muscle-invasive bladder cancer from Alberta, Canada.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectivesThere is growing interest in a bladder preservation approach using chemoradiation therapy with transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT), i.e., combined modality treatment (CMT), for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). We have initiated a pilot study to determine feasibility of conducting a larger-scale clinical trial comparing CMT to radical cystectomy (RC) in patients with MIBC. Here we present the screening logs from the recruitment phase of this trial.
methodsPatients who were diagnosed to have MIBC after TURBT between April 2016 and August 2017 and considered to be candidates for surgery were enrolled in this prospective, single center, randomized controlled pilot feasibility trial and scheduled to undergo RC (with neoadjuvant chemotherapy if appropriate) or CMT.
resultsOf 62 patients screened during the recruitment phase, only 5 were found to be suitable candidates for either treatment modality hence eligible for randomization. The reasons for exclusion were as follows: multifocal disease (n = 24, 40%), variant histology (n = 15, 25%), previous pelvic radiation (n = 6, 10%), severe lower urinary tract symptoms (n = 5, 8.3%), unwillingness to be enrolled (n = 8, 13.3%), and receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 2, 3.3%). One of the 5 eligible patients was randomized to CMT but was subsequently switched to RC because of a high tumor burden, 1 was randomized to RC, 2 were randomized to CMT but subsequently underwent TURBT and were considered ineligible because of extensive bladder disease, and 1 elected to undergo RC.
conclusionsWe identified many patients with MIBC over a period of 16 months. However, the number of patients eligible to receive chemotherapy and in whom cystectomy and radiation therapy were both valid options was not as high as previously reported in retrospective CMT series. Many patients were excluded after TURBT. Our preliminary data indicate that only a very small subset of patients with MIBC are ideal candidates for CMT. Further research is required to identify patients who are suitable for CMT.
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.