ReviewTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2024
Efficiency of bladder-sparing strategies for bladder cancer: an umbrella review.
Review in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- GREM1 may be a biological indicator and potential target of bladder cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Role of repeat transurethral resection in no-muscle-invasive bladder tumour: an umbrella review.Therapeutic advances in medical 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bladder preservation (BP) has emerged as a clinical alternative to radical cystectomy (RC) for alleviating the substantial physical and psychological burden imposed on localized bladder cancer patients. Nevertheless, disparities persist in the comparative evaluations of BP and RC. We aimed to address the disparities between BP and RC. An umbrella review and meta-analysis were conducted to explore these disparities. We extracted data from meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) selected after searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Review Manager 5.4.0 and R x64 4.1.3 were used to evaluate the collected data. Our study included 11 meta-analyses and 3 RCTs. In terms of progression-free survival, all the meta-analyses reported that patients with localized bladder cancer who underwent BP exhibited outcomes comparable to those who underwent RC. Meta-analyses regarding the outcomes of cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) are controversial. To solve these issues, we conducted a pooled analysis of CSS data, which supported the similarity of CSS between BP and RC with no significant heterogeneity [odds ratio (OR): 1.2; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-2.02;
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.