ArticleBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2024
Eligibility and Endpoints for Clinical Trials in Trimodality Therapy for Bladder Cancer.
Article in Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bladder Preservation in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis from British Columbia.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- End Points for the Next-Generation Bladder-Sparing Perioperative Trials for Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025Article
- Current State of Bladder Preservation in High Grade Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer and Localized Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.Current oncology reports · 2025Review
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
Abstract
backgroundTrimodality therapy (TMT) is a viable option for muscle-invasive localized bladder cancer, providing an alternative to radical cystectomy in properly selected patients. The approval of novel therapeutics in different stages of bladder cancer treatment has sparked interest in exploring concurrent systemic therapies with radiation in clinical trials to enhance long-term outcomes. Achieving uniformity in trial eligibility criteria and endpoint definitions is imperative in describing clinical significance, comparing trials, and changing standard of care guidelines.
objectiveTo delineate eligibility criteria and appropriate endpoints for TMT clinical trials in an attempt to achieve uniformity in trial eligibility criteria and endpoint definitions which will then help move the field of bladder preservation forward and improve the current standard of care.
methodsAn expert panel, comprising individuals with extensive experience in bladder cancer clinical trials, clinical practice focused on bladder cancer treatment, and patient advocacy, was assembled. The panel systematically reviewed phase II/III clinical trials previously published and assessing the role of radiation in definitive therapy with the specific goal of preserving native bladder function during bladder cancer treatment. Recommendations were summarized based on review of these trials and past experiences of the investigators. To ensure a holistic perspective, the summary was further subjected to rigorous reevaluation by a patient advocate, who added valuable insights from a patient's standpoint. The resulting consensus statements were summarized in this publication to contribute to the evolving landscape of bladder cancer research and treatment.
resultsThe eligibility criteria for TMT should be pragmatic to encompass patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, bladder cancer stage T2-T4a N0±N1M0, unilateral tumor-associated hydronephrosis, attempted maximal transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT), both pure urothelial carcinoma and/or mixed histologic subtypes (excluding rare and aggressive small cell variants) and patients who are non- cystectomy candidates. Bladder intact event-free survival (BIEFS) is proposed as a suitable endpoint for registration trials designed to compare two different treatment interventions, defined as the time from randomization to muscle-invasive or locoregional recurrence, systemic recurrence, radical cystectomy from any cause, or death from any cause. Overall survival is deemed an appropriate secondary endpoint or a co-primary end point as recent improvements in systemic therapy can produce significant improvement in long-term outcomes. Primary and secondary endpoints should be supported with patient-reported quality of life assessments, when available.
conclusionsThe standardization of clinical trial design, eligibility criteria, and endpoints is essential for expediting progress in the field. Inclusivity, patient-centricity, and clinically meaningful endpoints will facilitate the analysis, comparison, and meta-analysis of different trials, fostering advancements in bladder cancer treatment.
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.