Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37187719›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2023

Carboplatin Induction Chemotherapy in Clinically Lymph Node-positive Bladder Cancer.

Markus von Deimling, Laura S Mertens, Bas W G van Rhijn, Yair Lotan, Philippe E Spiess, Siamak Daneshmand, Peter C Black, Maximilian Pallauf, David D'Andrea, Marco Moschini and 17 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

27 authors at 17 institutions in 13 countries.

Markus von DeimlingDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Laura S MertensDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bas W G van RhijnDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Yair LotanDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA.
Philippe E SpiessDepartment of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.
Siamak DaneshmandUSC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Peter C BlackVancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Maximilian PallaufDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
David D'AndreaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Marco MoschiniDepartment of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Francesco SoriaDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy.
Francesco Del GiudiceDepartment of Maternal Infant and Urologic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Luca AfferiDepartment of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Switzerland.
Ekaterina LaukhtinaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Takafumi YanagisawaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Tatsushi KawadaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Jeremy Y-C TeohS.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Mohammad AbufarajDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Guillaume PloussardDepartment of Urology, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint-Fonsegrives, France.
Mathieu RoumiguiéDepartment of Urology, CHU Toulouse-IUCT Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
Pierre I KarakiewiczCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada.
Marko BabjukDepartment of Urology, Hospital Motol, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czechia.
Paolo GonteroDivision of Urology, Molinette Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Torino, Italy.
Evanguelos XylinasDepartment of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, AP-HP, Paris University, Paris, France.
Michael RinkDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Shahrokh F ShariatDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Benjamin PradereDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna · ATMedical University of Vienna · ATThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLUniversität Hamburg · DECharles University · CZChinese University of Hong Kong · HKFondazione Ricerca Molinette · ITInstitut universitaire du cancer de Toulouse Oncopole · FRLuzerner Kantonsspital · CHMoffitt Cancer Center · USPoliclinico Umberto I · ITThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversité de Montréal · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Jordan · JOUniversity of Southern California · USVita-Salute San Raffaele University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There are currently no guideline recommendations regarding the treatment of cisplatin-ineligible, clinically lymph node-positive (cN+) bladder cancer (BCa). Objective: To investigate the oncological efficacy of gemcitabine/carboplatin induction chemotherapy (IC) in comparison to cisplatin-based regimens in cN+ BCa. Design setting and participants: This was an observational study of 369 patients with cT2-4 N1-3 M0 BCa. Intervention: IC followed by consolidative radical cystectomy (RC). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary endpoints were the pathological objective response (pOR; ypT0/Ta/Tis/T1 N0) rate and the pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0N0) rate. We applied 3:1 propensity score matching (PSM) to reduce selection bias. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared across groups using the Kaplan-Meier method. Associations between the treatment regimen and survival endpoints were tested in multivariable Cox regression analyses. Results and limitations: After PSM, a cohort of 216 patients was available for analysis, of whom 162 received cisplatin-based IC and 54 gemcitabine/carboplatin IC. At RC, 54 patients (25%) had a pOR and 36 (17%) had a pCR. The 2-yr CSS was 59.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 51.9-69%) for patients who received cisplatin-based IC versus 38.8% (95% CI 26-57.9%) for those who received gemcitabine/carboplatin. For the pOR ( Conclusions: Cisplatin-based IC seems to be superior to gemcitabine/carboplatin and should be the standard for cisplatin-eligible patients with cN+ BCa. Gemcitabine/carboplatin may be an alternative treatment for selected cisplatin-ineligible patients with cN+ BCa. In particular, selected cisplatin-ineligible patients with cN1 disease may benefit from gemcitabine/carboplatin IC. Patient summary: In this multicenter study, we found that selected patients with bladder cancer and clinical evidence of lymph node metastasis who cannot receive standard cisplatin-based chemotherapy before surgery to remove their bladder may benefit from chemotherapy with gemcitabine/carboplatin. Patients with a single lymph node metastasis may benefit the most.

Indexed as

CarboplatinInduction chemotherapyOligometastaticSurvivalUrinary bladder neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID37187719
PMCPMC10175724
OpenAlexW4360966436

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.