ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2022
Presence and predominance of histological grade 3 define cT1HG bladder cancer prognostic groups.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurrent World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (2004 WHO/ISUP) grading of bladder urothelial carcinoma relies on the highest pathologic grade of the specimen and does not reflect the inherent qualitative and quantitative heterogeneity of disease. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively studied consecutive urothelial high-grade cT1 (cT1HG) carcinomas submitted to adjuvant bacille Calmette-Guérin between 2008 and 2015 to evaluate the prognostic potential of grade 3 (presence or predominance) according to the 1973 WHO system concerning disease progression and cancer-specific death.
resultsAmong 253 patients, grading distribution was 34.4% 1+2, 7.5% 2+1, 20.2% 2+2, 19.0% 2+3, 5.1% 3+2, and 13.8% 3+3. Recurrence was diagnosed in 115 (45.5%), progression in 83 (32.8%), and cancer-specific death in 50 patients (19.8%). Mean time to recurrence, progression, and death from disease were 35.9±31.7, 47.6±44.5, and 51.2±50.4 months, respectively. Grade 3 presence (2+3, 3+2, or 3+3) occurred in 96 (37.9%) and independently predicted time to progression (p<0.001; hazard ratio [HR], 3.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88-5.14). Grade 3 predominance (3+2 or 3+3) occurred in 48 (18.9%) and independently predicted time to disease-specific death.
conclusionsGrade 3 presence and predominance are independent predictors of progression and disease-specific death and occur in about 40% and 20% of cT1HG, respectively. Describing qualitative and quantitative heterogeneity in urothelial carcinoma grading might improve the stratification of patients. This gives three prognostic high-grade groups based on WHO/ISUP 1973: prognostic grade group I (grade 3 absence), prognostic grade group II (grade 3 presence), and prognostic grade group III (grade 3 predominance).
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.