ReviewBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2021
Tumor Subtyping: Making Sense of Heterogeneity with a Goal Toward Treatment.
Review in Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immunohistochemical evaluation of molecular subtypes in muscle invasive bladder cancer with demographic correlation.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Therapeutic Role of Lymph Node Dissection in Variant Subtype Bladder Cancer.Cancers · 2025Article
- Histological and immunohistochemical approaches to molecular subtyping in muscle-invasive bladder cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Immunohistochemical based molecular subtypes of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: association with HER2 and EGFR alterations, neoadjuvant chemotherapy response and survival.Diagnostic pathology · 2023Article
- Review
- Single-cell RNA sequencing and spatial transcriptome analysis in bladder cancer: Current status and future perspectives.Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Review
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
backgroundBladder cancers have high total mutation burdens resulting in genomic diversity and intra- and inter-tumor heterogeneity that may impact the diversity of gene expression, biologic aggressiveness, and potentially response to therapy. To compare bladder cancers among patients, an organizational structure is necessary that describes the tumor at the histologic and molecular level. These "molecular subtypes", or "expression subtypes" of bladder cancer were originally described in 2010 and continue to evolve secondary to next generation sequencing (NGS) and an increasing public repository of well-annotated cohorts.
objectiveTo review the history and methodology of expression-based subtyping of non-muscle invasive (NMIBC) and muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).
methodsA literature review was performed of primary papers from PubMed that described subtyping methods and their descriptive feature including search terms of "subtype", and "bladder cancer".
results21 papers were identified for review. Tumor subtyping developed from N = 2 to N = 6 subtyping schemes with most subtypes comprised of at least luminal and basal tumors. Most NMIBCs are luminal cancers and luminal MIBCs may be associated with less aggressive features, while one study of basal tumors identified a better clinical outcome with systemic chemotherapy. Tumors with a P53-like may have intrinsic resistance to chemotherapy. The heterogeneity of tumors, which is likely derived from stromal components and immune cell infiltration, affect subtype calls.
conclusionSubtyping, while still evolving, is ready for testing in clinical trials. Improved patient selection with tumor subtyping may help with tumor classification and potentially match patient or tumor to therapy.
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.