ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology
Emerging perioperative therapeutic approaches in muscle invasive bladder cancer.
Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adjuvant Nivolumab in High-Risk Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma: Expanded Efficacy From CheckMate 274.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025Trial
- A Systematic Literature Review of Real-World Treatment Effectiveness and Economic and Humanistic Burden in Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Who Underwent Radical Cystectomy.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2025Review
- A narrative review of management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer perioperative period: will continuous and combined treatment be the new trend?Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- Article
- Perioperative treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer in the era of immunotherapy.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bladder cancer is a significant healthcare burden with more than 17,000 deaths in the United States in 2018. Patients who are diagnosed with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) have a high rate of micro-metastatic disease and have a much poorer prognosis compared with patients who have less advanced lesions. Historically, neoadjuvant administration of cisplatin-based therapy followed by surgery has been the mainstay of treatment. Unfortunately, of patients who come in with initially diagnosed MIBC, more than 50% are ineligible for traditional cisplatin-based therapy. Today, new modalities of treatment such as immune checkpoint inhibitors are beginning to radically improve outcomes in this population. The addition of immune checkpoint therapy to traditional chemotherapy appears to augment pathologic complete response rates in the bladder during surgery. Immunotherapy combinations also provide novel trimodality approaches with excellent outcomes in those pursuing non-surgical management. Pure immunotherapy approaches appear promising in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting, and the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab is now approved in the adjuvant setting for high-risk patients. Antibody drug conjugates, such as enfortumab vedotin, and targeted therapies, such as infigratinib, are in trials in the perioperative setting. This review article summarizes the current evidence and likely future developments for the management of muscle invasive bladder cancer in 2022 and beyond.
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.