ArticleBiomedicines2024
Can We Go beyond Pathology? The Prognostic Role of Risk Scoring Tools for Cancer-Specific Survival of Patients with Bladder Cancer Undergoing Radical Cystectomy.
Article in Biomedicines, 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.
- Impact of Surgical Wait Time on Survival After Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radical cystectomy (RC) remains a mainstay surgical treatment for non-metastatic muscle-invasive and BCG-unresponsive bladder cancer. Various perioperative scoring tools assess comorbidity burden, complication risks, and cancer-specific mortality (CSM) risk. We investigated the prognostic value of these scores in patients who underwent RC between 2015 and 2021. Cox proportional hazards were used in survival analyses. Risk models' accuracy was assessed with the concordance index (C-index) and area under the curve. Among 215 included RC patients, 63 (29.3%) died, including 53 (24.7%) cancer-specific deaths, with a median follow-up of 39 months. The AJCC system, COBRA score, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) predicted CSM with low accuracy (C-index: 0.66, 0.65; 0.59, respectively). Multivariable Cox regression identified the AJCC system and CCI > 5 as significant CSM predictors. Additional factors included the extent of lymph node dissection, histology, smoking, presence of concomitant CIS, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and model accuracy was high (C-index: 0.80). The internal validation of the model with bootstrap samples revealed its slight optimism of 0.06. In conclusion, the accuracy of the AJCC staging system in the prediction of CSM is low and can be improved with the inclusion of other pathological data, CCI, smoking history and inflammatory indices.
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.