Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37347252›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of urology2023

Comparison between different neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens and local therapy alone for bladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of oncologic outcomes.

Abdulmajeed Aydh, Reza Sari Motlagh, Abdulaziz Alamri, Takafumi Yanagisawa, Adil Ayed, Pawel Rajwa, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Saeed M Alasiri, Tatsushi Kawada, Hadi Mostafai and 6 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Gender aspects in urological disease.World journal of urology · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 8 institutions in 9 countries.

Abdulmajeed AydhDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Reza Sari MotlaghDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Abdulaziz AlamriDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Takafumi YanagisawaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Adil AyedDepartment of Family Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Pawel RajwaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Ekaterina LaukhtinaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Saeed M AlasiriDepartment of Urology, Aseer Central Hospital, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Tatsushi KawadaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Hadi MostafaiDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Abdulelah AyidhDepartment of Radiology, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Maximilian PallaufDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Frederik KönigDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Mohammad AbufarajDivision of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
Pierre I KarakiewiczCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada.
Shahrokh F ShariatDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at.
Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna · ATKing Khalid University · SAMedical University of Vienna · ATVienna General Hospital · ATAsir Central Hospital · SAUniversité de Montréal · CAUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DEUniversity of Jordan · JO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe present systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the current different neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimes for bladder cancer patients to rank them.

methodsWe used the Bayesian approach in NMA of six different therapy regimens cisplatin, cisplatin/doxorubicin, (gemcitabine/cisplatin) GC, cisplatin/methotrexate, methotrexate, cisplatin, and vinblastine (MCV) and (MVAC) compared to locoregional treatment.

resultsFifteen studies comprised 4276 patients who met the eligibility criteria. Six different regimes were not significantly associated with a lower likelihood of overall mortality rate compared to local treatment alone. In progression-free survival (PFS) rates, cisplatin, GC, cisplatin/methotrexate, MCV and MVAC were not significantly associated with a higher likelihood of PFS rate compared to locoregional treatment alone. In local control outcome, MCV, MVAC, GC and cisplatin/methotrexate were not significantly associated with a higher likelihood of local control rate versus locoregional treatment alone. Nevertheless, based on the analyses of the treatment ranking according to SUCRA, it was highly likely that MVAC with high certainty of results appeared as the most effective approach in terms of mortality, PFS and local control rates. GC and cisplatin/doxorubicin with low certainty of results was found to be the best second options.

conclusionNo significant differences were observed in mortality, progression-free survival and local control rates before and after adjusting the type of definitive treatment in any of the six study arms. However, MVAC was found to be the most effective regimen with high certainty, while cisplatin alone and cisplatin/methotrexate should not be recommended as a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regime.

Indexed as

CisplatinUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBayes TheoremCystectomyDoxorubicinGemcitabineHumansMethotrexateNeoadjuvant TherapyVinblastineCisplatinDoxorubicinGemcitabineMethotrexateVinblastineBladder cancerChemotherapyCisplatinNeoadjuvantRadical cystectomy

Identifiers

PMID37347252
PMCPMC10415490
OpenAlexW4381598842

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.