SynthesisInvestigative and clinical urology2023
Therapeutic responses to chemotherapy or immunotherapy by molecular subtype in bladder cancer patients: A meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Investigative and clinical urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumor immune dysfunction and exclusion subtypes in bladder cancer and pan-cancer: a novel molecular subtyping strategy and immunotherapeutic prediction model.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To systematically evaluate the differences in therapeutic response to chemotherapy or immunotherapy between different molecular subtypes of bladder cancer (BC). A comprehensive literature search was performed up to December 2021. Consensus clusters 1 (CC1), CC2 and CC3 molecular subtypes were used to perform meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the therapeutic response by fix-effect modeling. Eight studies involving 1,463 patients were included. For immunotherapy, CC3 showed the highest response rate (CC1 vs. CC3: OR=0.52, 95% CI=0.34-0.78, p=0.002; CC2 vs. CC3: OR=0.42, 95% CI=0.28-0.62, p<0.001), which was mainly reflected in the highest response rate to atezolizumab (CC1 vs. CC3: OR=0.47, 95% CI=0.29-0.75, p=0.002; CC2 vs. CC3: OR=0.38, 95% CI=0.24-0.59, p<0.001). For chemotherapy, CC3 had the lowest response rate to the overall chemotherapy (CC1 vs. CC3: OR=2.05, 95% CI=1.23-3.41, p=0.006; CC2 vs. CC3: OR=2.48, 95% CI=1.50-4.10, p<0.001). Compared with CC2, CC3 responded poorly to both neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) (OR=1.93, 95% CI=1.09-3.41, p=0.020) and chemoradiation therapy (CRT) (OR=6.07, 95% CI=1.87-19.71, p<0.001). Compared with CC1, CC3 only showed a poorer response to CRT (OR=4.53, 95% CI=1.26-16.27, p=0.020), and no difference in NAC. Our study suggested that molecular classifications are important predictors of cancer treatment outcomes of BC patients and could identify subgroup patients who are most likely to benefit from specific cancer treatments.
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.