ReviewNature reviews. Urology2025
Pre-treatment metastatic biopsy: a step towards precision oncology for urothelial cancer.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2025. 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.
- Circulating tumour cells for guiding antibody‒drug conjugate therapy: Role of artificial intelligence.Clinical and translational medicine · 2026Review
- [From nontargeted to precision oncology: predictive biomarkers and targeted therapies in advanced urothelial carcinoma].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Mechanisms of resistance to antibody-drug conjugates in bladder cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- HER2/neu and Ki-67 as prognostic biomarkers in urothelial carcinoma.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Single-cell and spatial atlas unveil tumor-specific microenvironment convergence and a prognosis-associated PLXDC1+ myofibroblast population in metastatic bladder cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Bladder cancer subtypes exhibit limited plasticity across different microenvironments and in metastases.Experimental hematology & oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early metastatic spread and clonal expansion of individual mutations result in a heterogeneous tumour landscape in metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). Substantial molecular heterogeneity of common drug targets, such as membranous NECTIN4, FGFR3 mutations, PDL1 or immune phenotypes, has been documented between primary and metastatic tumours. However, translational and clinical studies frequently do not account for such heterogeneity and often investigate primary tumour samples that might not be representative in patients with mUC. We propose this as a potential factor for why many biomarkers for mUC have failed to be integrated into clinical practice. Fresh pre-treatment metastatic biopsies enable the capturing of prevailing tumour biology in real time. The characterization of metastatic tumour samples can improve response prediction to immunotherapy, the anti-NECTIN4 antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin and the FGFR inhibitor erdafitinib. Routine metastatic biopsy can thus improve the precision of identifying driver druggable alterations, thus improving treatment selection for patients with mUC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39472646What 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.