Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34955291›Full record

ReviewEuropean urology2022

International Bladder Cancer Group Consensus Statement on Clinical Trial Design for Patients with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-exposed High-risk Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer.

Mathieu Roumiguié, Ashish M Kamat, Trinity J Bivalacqua, Seth P Lerner, Wassim Kassouf, Andreas Böhle, Maurizio Brausi, Roger Buckley, Raj Persad, Marc Colombel and 9 more

Abstract readReviewConsensus Statement
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Advances in the management of localized bladder cancers.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 14 institutions in 7 countries.

Mathieu RoumiguiéVancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Urology, Toulouse Cancer Institute and Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
Ashish M KamatDepartment of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Trinity J BivalacquaPerelman Center for Advanced Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: trinity.bivalacqua@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Seth P LernerScott Department of Urology, Dan L. Duncan Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Wassim KassoufDepartment of Surgery (Urology), Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Andreas BöhleDepartments of Urology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany; HELIOS Agnes-Karll-Krankenhaus, Bad Schwartau, Germany.
Maurizio BrausiDepartment of Urology, Hesperia Hospital, Modena, Italy.
Roger BuckleyNorth York General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Raj PersadDepartment of Urology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol Hospitals Trust, Bristol, UK.
Marc ColombelClaude Bernard University, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France.
Donald LammUniversity of Arizona and BCG Oncology, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Juan Palou-RedortaDepartment of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Mark SolowayDivision of Urology, Memorial Cancer Institute, Memorial Hospital, Hollywood, FL, USA.
Ken BrothersPatient Advocate, National Cancer Institute Bladder Cancer Task Force, Snowbasin, UT, USA.
Gary SteinbergDepartment of Urology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Yair LotanDepartment of Urology, UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA.
Richard SylvesterEuropean Association of Urology Guidelines Office, Brussels, Belgium.
J Alfred WitjesDepartment of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Peter C BlackVancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. Electronic address: peter.black@ubc.ca.
Baylor College of Medicine · USHesperia Hospital · ITHôpital Edouard Herriot · FRMcGill University · CAMemorial Hospital · USNational Cancer Institute · USNorth York General Hospital · CANYU Langone Health · USRadboud University Nijmegen · NLSouthmead Hospital · GBSouthwestern Medical Center · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextA large proportion of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) fall in the gap between bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)-naïve and BCG-unresponsive disease. As multiple therapeutic agents move into this gray area, there is a critical need to define the disease state and establish recommendations for optimal trial design.

objectiveTo develop a consensus on optimal trial design for patients with BCG-exposed NMIBC, defined as high-grade recurrence after BCG treatment that does not meet the criteria for BCG-unresponsive disease. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We conducted a literature review using the Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase and a review of clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov as a basis to generate consensus recommendations for clinical trial design in BCG-exposed NMIBC. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: BCG-exposed NMIBC encompasses BCG resistance (presence of high-grade Ta or carcinoma in situ [CIS] at 3-mo evaluation after induction BCG) and delayed relapse. Randomized controlled trials are required to compare experimental therapies to a control arm receiving additional BCG, although ongoing BCG shortages may impact our ability to follow an optimal trial design. A placebo should be used in combination with BCG if the treatment arm includes BCG plus a study drug. Trials will either need to separate patients with and without CIS into two cohorts, or stratify by the presence of CIS at the time of randomization. If two cohorts are used, the primary endpoint for CIS patients should be complete response within a predetermined time. The primary endpoint in a cohort with Ta/T1 only, or if a single combined cohort is used, should be the duration of event-free survival. Suggested efficacy thresholds and corresponding sample sizes are provided.

conclusionsThe International Bladder Cancer Group has developed recommendations regarding definitions, endpoints, and clinical trial design for BCG-exposed NMIBC to encourage uniformity among studies in this disease state. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our consensus provides a precise definition of the disease state for bladder cancer not invading the bladder muscle and exposed to bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) treatment. Clear guidance for conducting optimal clinical trials in this disease setting was established and we believe that this will promote further progress in this field.

Indexed as

Carcinoma in SituUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAdjuvants, ImmunologicAdministration, IntravesicalBCG VaccineClinical Trials as TopicHumansMusclesNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUrinary BladderAdjuvants, ImmunologicBCG VaccineBacillus Calmette-GuérinClinical trialsIntravesical therapyNon–muscle-invasive bladder cancerRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID34955291
OpenAlexW4200180513

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.