ArticleUrology research & practice2024
Role of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Pathological, Functional, and Survival Outcomes of Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Urology research & practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modern management of locally advanced urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- Beyond diagnosis: exploring the extended clinical utility of urine fluorescence in situ hybridization in upper tract urothelial carcinoma.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Consensus statements from the Hong Kong Urological Association and the Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology on the management of muscle-invasive and advanced urothelial carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Case report: Radical robotic nephroureterectomy after chemotherapy followed by avelumab in a patient with node-positive UTUC.Frontiers in oncology · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC) is not yet confirmed. Therefore, we conducted this review to pool the available evidence in this regard. We analyzed 14117 UTUC patients reported in 21 studies after searching 5 databases. The NAC was administered in 1983 patients and the remaining 12134 controls underwent radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) alone. Efficacy endpoints included pathological, functional, and survival outcomes. Safety was determined by overall and grade 3-4 complications. For dichotomous outcomes, the log odds ratio (logOR) was pooled, and for continuous variables, the crude mean difference was calculated along with its 95% CI. The NAC was associated with 10% complete pathological response (CPR), 42% pathological downstaging, 31% post-NAC advanced disease (pT3-4), 6% positive surgical margin, 18% lymph node metastasis (pN+), 24% lymphovascular invasion, and 29% mortality and recurrence at 5 years. Compared to controls, NAC resulted in increased risk of CPR [logOR=1.67; 95% CI, 0.11-3.23] and downstaging [logOR=1.30; 95% CI, 0.41-2.18] and reduced risk of advanced disease [logOR=-0.81; 95% CI, -1.51--0.11]. Renal function did not improve from baseline; however, it increased significantly after RNU. The NAC was associated with good survival/low mortality in the short term, with a sustained increase over time. Overall and grade 3-4 complications occurred in 25% and 7% of patients, respectively. Our findings support the potential benefits of NAC in enhancing pathological outcomes and possibly improving survival in UTUC patients undergoing RNU. The variability in response and associated complications underscore the importance of careful patient selection and tailored treatment approaches.
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.