Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31740072›Full record

Trial reportEuropean urology2020

Long-term Oncological Outcomes from an Early Phase Randomised Controlled Three-arm Trial of Open, Robotic, and Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy (CORAL).

Muhammad Shamim Khan, Kawa Omar, Kamran Ahmed, Christine Gan, Mieke Van Hemelrijck, Rajesh Nair, Ramesh Thurairaja, Peter Rimington, Prokar Dasgupta

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Comparison of Robotic vs Open Cystectomy: A Systematic Review.Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The death of laparoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Muhammad Shamim KhanDepartment of Urology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; MRC Centre for Transplantation, King's College London, London, UK. Electronic address: shamim.khan@gstt.nhs.uk.
Kawa OmarDepartment of Urology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Kamran AhmedMRC Centre for Transplantation, King's College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, King's College Hospital, Denmark Hill, London, UK.
Christine GanDepartment of Urology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Mieke Van HemelrijckKing's College London, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Studies, Translational Oncology & Urology Research (TOUR), London, UK.
Rajesh NairDepartment of Urology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Ramesh ThurairajaDepartment of Urology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Peter RimingtonDepartment of Urology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Prokar DasguptaDepartment of Urology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; MRC Centre for Transplantation, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic (LRC) and robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) are still maturing compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC).

objectiveTo evaluate the 5-yr oncological outcomes of patients recruited into the randomised trial of Open, Laparoscopic and Robot Assisted Cystectomy (CORAL) and extracorporeal urinary diversion. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsA review of prospectively maintained database of 60 patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) or high-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (HRNMIBC) who were previously randomised in the CORAL trial to receive ORC, RARC, or LRC. This trial was designed to compare the perioperative and early oncological outcomes of these techniques. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The outcomes of interest included 5-yr recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier curves were used to plot the recurrence and survival data. The curves between RFS, CSS, and OS were compared using the log-rank test. A two-sided p value <0.05 was considered significant. Results were analysed on the basis of intention to treat. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 60 patients with either MIBC (n=38) or HRNMIBC (n=21) were randomised in the CORAL trial to receive ORC, RARC, or LRC. The 5-yr RFS was 60%, 58%, and 71%; 5-yr CSS was 64%, 68%, and 69%; and 5-yr OS was 55%, 65%, and 61% for ORC, RARC, and LRC, respectively. There was no significant difference in RFS, CSS, and OS between the three surgical arms. The principal limitation is the small sample size.

conclusionsThere was no difference in 5-yr RFS, CSS, and OS rates of patients who underwent ORC, RARC, and LRC for management of bladder cancer. Minimally invasive techniques achieved equivalent oncological outcomes to the gold standard of ORC. However, the study was based at a single institution with a small sample size. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients who agreed to participate in the randomised trial of either open, laparoscopic, or robotic-assisted radical cystectomy for bladder cancer did not have different cancer outcomes at 5yr.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCystectomyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessProspective StudiesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBladder cancerOpen cystectomyRobotic cystectomy

Identifiers

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.