Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33457262›Full record

ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2020

Update on bladder cancer molecular subtypes.

Megan Hoi Yan Fong, Mingxiao Feng, David J McConkey, Woonyoung Choi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Phase II Trial of Guadecitabine plus Atezolizumab in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Progressing after Initial Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2023
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A Review with a Focus onPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Megan Hoi Yan FongJohns Hopkins Greenberg Bladder Cancer Institute and Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Mingxiao FengJohns Hopkins Greenberg Bladder Cancer Institute and Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
David J McConkeyJohns Hopkins Greenberg Bladder Cancer Institute and Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Woonyoung ChoiJohns Hopkins Greenberg Bladder Cancer Institute and Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2014, there was a burst of studies on the molecular subtypes of bladder cancer in the published literature that was made possible by the advances in high-throughput technologies. Based on gene expression profiling, the major molecular classification subdivisions were basal and luminal subtypes, which resembled to those observed in breast cancers. These basal and luminal subtypes were further subdivided by TCGA into squamous, infiltrated, luminal-papillary, luminal/genomically unstable (GU), and neuronal/small cell carcinoma (SCC) subtypes. Recently, an international subtypes consensus project further expanded on the TCGA subtypes by defining a consensus molecular classification (CMC). A multidisciplinary team of experts generated CMC to overcome the difficulties of clinical applications due to several published bladder cancer molecular classifications with various nomenclatures and molecular features. It included six molecular subtypes with the addition of one more luminal subtype (luminal nonspecified) compared to the TCGA subtype classification. The initial research efforts have focused on the characterization of each subtype at the molecular and histopathologic levels, but more recent studies have examined their significance in terms of clinical utility, i.e., biomarkers that inform prognostication and/or to predict therapeutic responses to be tested in future clinical trials. This review provides an overview of recent investigations into the relationship between molecular subtypes and the clinical management of patients with bladder cancer.

Indexed as

bladder cancerclinical applicationMolecular subtypes

Identifiers

PMID33457262
PMCPMC7807369

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.