ReviewCancer cell international2020
Sarcomatoid variant urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinicopathological features and survival outcomes.
Review in Cancer cell international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conversion to Pathological Complete Response by Enfortumab Vedotin in Metastatic Sarcomatoid Urothelial Carcinoma With Nectin-4 Expression: A Case Report.IJU case reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Advances in Therapy for Urothelial and Non-Urothelial Subtype Histologies of Advanced Bladder Cancer: From Etiology to Current Development.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- CT and MRI features of sarcomatoid urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and its differential diagnosis with conventional urothelial carcinoma.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Clinical efficacy analysis of partial cystectomy and radical cystectomy in the treatment of muscle-invasive sarcomatoid carcinoma of the urinary bladder.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Neoadjuvant Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, and Docetaxel in Sarcomatoid Bladder Cancer: Clinical Activity and Whole Transcriptome Analysis.Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- The Many Faces of Urothelial Carcinomas: An Update From Pathology to Clinical Approach and Challenges in Practice.Urology research & practice · 2023Article
- Prognostic value of the sarcomatoid component in bladder cancer: A propensity score matching study.Oncology letters · 2023Article
- Sarcomatoid urothelial carcinoma arising in the female urethral diverticulum.Journal of pathology and translational medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinicopathological features and survival outcomes between sarcomatoid variant (SV)-urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB) and conventional UCB (C-UCB).
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library was performed. Endpoints included clinicopathological features and survival outcomes (overall survival [OS], cancer-specific survival [CSS], and progression-free survival [PFS]). The survival benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for SV-UCB also have been studied.
resultsA total of 8 observational studies were included. Patients with SV-UCB had a higher rate of ≥ stage pT3 (odds ratio [OR], 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.64-2.59; p < 0.001) and a lower rate of concomitant carcinoma in situ (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.09-0.72; p = 0.010). The other clinicopathological variables were similar between SV-UCB and C-UCB. With unadjusted data, patients with SV-UCB had a significant inferior OS (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.44; p = 0.004) and CSS (HR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.63-2.66; p < 0.001). However, after adjusted, SV-UCB had worse OS (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.95-2.08; p = 0.090) and CSS (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.95-2.52; p = 0.080) approaching the borderline of significance. For SV-UCB, NAC (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.51-1.05; p = 0.090) and AC (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66-1.17; p = 0.370) seemed to have no benefit on OS.
conclusionsCompared to C-UCB, SV-UCB was associated with more advanced disease and more inferior OS and CSS. NAC and AC had no survival benefit for SV-UCB.
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.