SynthesisBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cisplatin Based Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.
Synthesis in Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Indirect Comparison of Neoadjuvant Treatment Strategies for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: ddMVAC and Perioperative Durvalumab-Gemcitabine-Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.International journal of cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the standard of care for muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).
objectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of the two most commonly used cisplatin-based regimens; gemcitabine, and cisplatin (GC) vs. accelerated (dose-dense: dd) or conventional methotrexate, vinblastine, adriamycin, and cisplatin (MVAC).
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and other sources. Outcomes of interest included overall survival, downstaging to pT≤1, pathologic complete response (pCR), recurrence, and toxicity. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model.
resultsWe identified 24 studies. Efficacy outcomes were comparable between MVAC and GC for MIBC. dd-MVAC was associated with favorable efficacy compared to GC in terms of downstaging (OR 1.45; 95%CI 1.15-1.82) and all-cause mortality at longest follow-up (OR 0.63; 95%CI 0.44-0.81). However, GC was associated with a better safety profile in terms of febrile neutropenia (OR 0.32; 95%CI 0.13-0.80), anemia (OR 0.32; 95%CI 0.18-0.54), nausea and vomiting (OR 0.27; 95%CI 0.12-0.65) compared to dd-MVAC. Compared to MVAC, patients receiving GC had an increased risk of developing grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (OR 4.70; 95%CI 1.59-13.89) and a lower risk of nausea and vomiting (OR 0.05; 95%CI 0.01-0.31). Certainty in the estimates was very low for most outcomes.
conclusionsEfficacy and safety outcomes were comparable between MVAC and GC for MIBC. Including non-peer-reviewed studies showed higher efficacy with dd-MVAC. A phase III randomized trial comparing the two regimens is needed to guide clinical practice.
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.