Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39246267›Full record

Trial reportHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2024

Image directed redesign of bladder cancer treatment pathways: the BladderPath RCT.

Nicholas James, Sarah Pirrie, Wenyu Liu, James Catto, Kieran Jefferson, Prashant Patel, Ana Hughes, Ann Pope, Veronica Nanton, Harriet P Mintz and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Nicholas JamesInstitute of Cancer Research, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7314-8204
Sarah PirrieCancer Research Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2894-2230
Wenyu LiuCancer Research Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6682-2053
James CattoDepartment of Urology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2787-8828
Kieran JeffersonDepartment of Urology, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0029-8359
Prashant PatelInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2882-5990
Ana HughesCancer Research Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7274-9422
Ann PopeCancer Research Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7458-3294
Veronica NantonMedical School, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9553-822X
Harriet P MintzCancer Research Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1583-6268
Allen KnightPatient and Public Involvement Representatives, Gallagher, Bradford Knight, Basingstoke, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8123-9547
Jean GallagherPatient and Public Involvement Representatives, Gallagher, Bradford Knight, Basingstoke, UK.ORCID 0009-0007-6308-2292
Richard T BryanBladder Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2853-4293

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Transurethral resection of bladder tumour has been the mainstay of bladder cancer staging for > 60 years. Staging inaccuracies are commonplace, leading to delayed treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging offers rapid, accurate and non-invasive staging of muscle-invasive bladder cancer, potentially reducing delays to radical treatment. Objectives: To assess the feasibility and efficacy of the introducing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging ahead of transurethral resection of bladder tumour in the staging of suspected muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Design: Open-label, multistage randomised controlled study in three parts: feasibility, intermediate and final clinical stages. The COVID pandemic prevented completion of the final stage. Setting: Fifteen UK hospitals. Participants: Newly diagnosed bladder cancer patients of age ≥ 18 years. Interventions: Participants were randomised to Pathway 1 or 2 following visual assessment of the suspicion of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer or muscle-invasive bladder cancer at the time of outpatient cystoscopy, based upon a 5-point Likert scale: Likert 1-2 tumours considered probable non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer; Likert 3-5 possible muscle-invasive bladder cancer. In Pathway 1, all participants underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumour. In Pathway 2, probable non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer participants underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumour, and possible muscle-invasive bladder cancer participants underwent initial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Subsequent therapy was determined by the treating team and could include transurethral resection of bladder tumour. Main outcome measures: Feasibility stage: proportion with possible muscle-invasive bladder cancer randomised to Pathway 2 which correctly followed the protocol. Intermediate stage: time to correct treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Results: Between 31 May 2018 and 31 December 2021, of 638 patients approached, 143 participants were randomised; 52.1% were deemed as possible muscle-invasive bladder cancer and 47.9% probable non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Feasibility stage: 36/39 [92% (95% confidence interval 79 to 98%)] muscle-invasive bladder cancer participants followed the correct treatment by pathway. Intermediate stage: median time to correct treatment was 98 (95% confidence interval 72 to 125) days for Pathway 1 versus 53 (95% confidence interval 20 to 89) days for Pathway 2 [hazard ratio 2.9 (95% confidence interval 1.0 to 8.1)], Limitations: For participants who underwent chemotherapy, radiotherapy or palliation for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-diagnosed stage T2 or higher disease, it was impossible to conclusively know whether these were correct treatments due to the absence of histopathologically confirmed muscle invasion, this being confirmed radiologically in these cases. All patients had histological confirmation of their cancers. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we were unable to realise the final stage. Conclusion: The multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-directed pathway led to a substantial 45-day reduction in time to correct treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, without detriment to non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer participants. Consideration should be given to the incorporation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging ahead of transurethral resection of bladder tumour into the standard pathway for all patients with suspected muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The improved decision-making accelerated time to treatment, even though many patients subsequently needed transurethral resection of bladder tumour. A proportion of patients can avoid transurethral resection of bladder tumour completely, reducing costs and morbidity, given the much lower cost of magnetic resonance imaging and biopsy compared to transurethral resection of bladder tumour. Future work: Further work to cross-correlate with the recently developed Vesical Imaging-Reporting and Data System will improve accuracy and aid dissemination. Longer follow-up to examine the effect of the pathway on outcomes is also required. Incorporation of liquid deoxyribonucleic acid-based biomarkers may further improve the quality of decision-making and should also be investigated further. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN 35296862. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR135775) and is published in full in

Indexed as

Neoplasm StagingUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overCOVID-19Critical PathwaysCystoscopyFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm InvasivenessTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalUnited KingdomBLADDER CANCERCLINICAL PATHWAYCLINICAL TRIALMAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGINGMRISTAGINGTRANSURETHRAL RESECTIONTURBT

Identifiers

PMID39246267
PMCPMC11403381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.