Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35607328›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology2022

Comparing Long-Term Survival Outcomes for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Patients Who Underwent with Radical Cystectomy and Bladder-Sparing Trimodality Therapy: A Multicentre Cohort Analysis.

Junlan Qiu, Haifeng Zhang, Dongkui Xu, Lin Li, Lingkai Xu, Yiqing Jiang, Tao Wen, Shun Lu, Fang Meng, Lin Feng and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Junlan QiuDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, The Affiliated Suzhou Science and Technology Town Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou 215153, China.
Haifeng ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Soochow University, Suzhou 215123, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8207-4569
Dongkui XuVIP Department, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Lin LiDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Soochow University, Suzhou 215123, China.
Lingkai XuDepartment for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Suzhou Wuzhong Center for Disease Prevention and Control, Suzhou 215128, China.
Yiqing JiangDepartment of General Surgery, Harrison International Peace Hospital, Hengshui 053000, China.
Tao WenMedical Research Centre, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China.
Shun LuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital/Institute, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, 610041 Chengdu, China.
Fang MengCentre of Systems Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, China.
Lin FengDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, The Affiliated Suzhou Science and Technology Town Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou 215153, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3962-3283
Xiaochen ShuDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Soochow University, Suzhou 215123, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4933-5851
Soochow University · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNSuzhou University of Science and Technology · CNCapital Medical University · CNHarrison International Peace Hospital · CNUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Although radical cystectomy (RC) is the clinical practice guideline-recommended treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), bladder-sparing trimodality therapy (TMT) has emerged as a valid treatment option. Findings comparing the survival outcomes for MIBC patients who underwent RC and TMT are inconclusive. Objective: We designed a large hospital-based multicohort study to compare the effectiveness of TMT with RC. Methods: Information on deaths was jointly retrieved from EMR (electronic medical record), cause of death registry, and chronic disease surveillance as well as study-specific questionnaire. To avoid the systematical difference between patients who received two modalities, RC-MIBC cohort was propensity score-matched to TMT-MIBC cohort, and the Cox proportional hazard regression was used to calculate the overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). Results: There were 891 MIBC patients treated with RC and another 891 MIBC patients who underwent with TMT in the propensity score matching. Comparable effectiveness between two modalities was observed for DSS (HR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94 to 1.49) and OS (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.43) according to multiple adjustment after a median follow-up of approximately 9.3 years. However, a relatively higher mortality rate around 5 years after TMT treatment was found compared to RC (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.53). The respective 5-year OS rates were 69% and 73% for TMT cohort and RC cohort, respectively. Conclusions: Our findings supported that MIBC patients with TMT yielded survival outcomes comparable to MIBC patients who underwent RC overall. Treatment options should be suggested considering patients' age and willingness.

Identifiers

PMID35607328
PMCPMC9124076
OpenAlexW4280577445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.