ArticleCancer medicine2021
Population-based analysis of perioperative chemotherapy use, interventions requiring hospitalization and atheroembolic events among patients with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gemcitabine Intravesical System Plus Cetrelimab or Cetrelimab Alone as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: SunRISe-4 Primary Analysis and Biomarker Results.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2026Article
- 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
- An Investigation of the Pathology Report of Bladder Cancer Patients with Radical Cystectomy in Southern Iran, 2013-2018: A Cross-Sectional Study.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUtilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) in muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is increasingly recognized as standard of care but trends of use in Ontario remain unknown. Currently, there remains knowledge gaps regarding the effects of perioperative chemotherapy on the rates of interventions requiring hospitalization (IRH) and atheroembolic events (ATEs).
methodsWe conducted a population-based retrospective study within the province of Ontario over 16 years. Patients with non-metastatic MIBC receiving surgery only or planned for perioperative chemotherapy were included. Primary outcomes included 2-year IRH and ATE rates. Univariate/multivariate analysis was used to identify predictors associated with IRHs and ATEs. Cochrane-Armitage was used to assess treatment trends over time.
resultsOur study included 3281 patients. RC alone occurred in 2030 (60.9%), NC in 974 (29.6%) and adjuvant chemotherapy in 8.4% (n = 277). A total of 490/974 (50.3%) patients whom initiated NC with RC intent failed to undergo RC. This improved to 20.5% by 2015 (p < 0.001). Use of NC increased by an absolute value of 33% (p < 0.001). Overall, 4.2% of patients experienced IRHs and 11.5% ATEs. On multivariate analysis, advanced age and Charlson index score (CI) were strong predictors of outcomes, not timing of perioperative chemotherapy (p < 0.05.)
conclusionA total of 29.6% of MIBC patients are planned for NC with 20.5% not progressing to their surgery. Use of NC has substantially increased over time. IRHs and ATEs remain stubbornly high at 4.2% and 11.5% respectively. Older age and higher CI scores are the strongest predictors of IRHs and ATEs (p < 0.05), not perioperative chemotherapy.
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.