Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32216043›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2020

Validation of EORTC, CUETO, and EAU risk stratification in prediction of recurrence, progression, and death of patients with initially non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC): A cohort analysis.

Mateusz Jobczyk, Konrad Stawiski, Wojciech Fendler, Waldemar Różański

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Therapeutic strategies for asymptomatic upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023
    Article
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

4 authors.

Mateusz JobczykDepartment of Urology, Copernicus Memorial Hospital, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-8615-5940
Konrad StawiskiDepartment of Biostatistics and Translational Medicine, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6550-3384
Wojciech FendlerDepartment of Biostatistics and Translational Medicine, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5083-9168
Waldemar RóżańskiDepartment of Urology, Copernicus Memorial Hospital, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

brief descriptionThe results demonstrate that the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) scale provides the best recurrence and progression prediction in comparison with European Association of Urology (EAU) and Club Urologico Espanol de Tratamiento Oncologico (CUETO) risk scores among a mixed population of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder who were treated with, or without, Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) and without any immediate postoperative chemotherapy. The study highlights the role of tumor diameter and extent in transition prediction. This retrospective cohort analysis of 322 patients with newly diagnosed non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) assesses the concordance and accuracy of predicting recurrence and progression by EAU-recommended tools (EAU risk groups, EORTC, and CUETO). One-year and five-year c-indices ranged from 0.55 to 0.66 for recurrence and from 0.72 to 0.82 for progression. AUCROC of predictions ranged from 0.46 for 1-year recurrence risk based on CUETO groups, to 0.82 for 1-year progression risk based on EAU risk groups. Diameter (HR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.39-2.61) and tumor extent (HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.01-1.46 for recurrence; HR: 3.1; 95% CI: 1.40-6.87 for progression) were shown to be significant predictors in multistate analysis. Lower accuracy of prediction was observed for patients treated with BCG maintenance immunotherapy. The EORTC model (overall c-index c = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.61-0.68) was superior to the EAU (P = .035; .62; 95% CI: 0.59-0.66) and CUETO (P < .001; c = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.50-0.56) models in predicting recurrence. The EORTC model (c = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.77-0.86) also performed better than CUETO (P = .008; c = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.66-0.81) but there was no sufficient evidence that it performed better than EAU (P = .572; c = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.77-0.84) for predicting progression. EORTC and CUETO gave similar predictions for progression in BCG-treated EAU high-risk patients (P = .48). We share anonymized individual patient data. In conclusion, despite moderate accuracy, EORTC provided the best recurrence and progression prediction for a mixed population of patients treated with, or without BCG, and without immediate postoperative chemotherapy.

Indexed as

AgedCystectomyDisease ProgressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPractice Guidelines as TopicPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSurvival RateUrinary Bladder Neoplasmsbladder cancernon-muscle-invasive bladder cancerpredictionrisk stratificationsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32216043
PMCPMC7286464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.