ArticleFrontiers in surgery2024
Association between tumor size and prognosis in bladder cancer: novel classifications and insights from a SEER database analysis.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel Model for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Diagnosis Using Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- A 7-cm inflection point: nonlinear association between maximum tumor diameter and capsular invasion risk after primary liver cancer resection.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Impact of Surgical Wait Time on Survival After Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- An interpretable CT-based deep learning model for predicting overall survival in patients with bladder cancer: a multicenter study.NPJ precision 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Although tumor size is an essential oncologic feature, it is often underutilized in diagnosing and treating bladder cancer (BC). This study investigates the relationship between tumor size and BC prognosis, aiming to enhance clinical applications. Methods: BC patients were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2004-2015). Cox proportional hazard models were conducted to identify prognostic factors, and restricted cubic splines (RCS) were used to assess the relationship between tumor size and survival outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate COX models were utilized to estimate the effect of the classification scheme. Results: A total of 69,478 patients with BC were evaluated from the SEER database. Larger tumor size, recent diagnosis, older age, high pathologic grade, variant histology, advanced T stages, positive lymph node status, and receipt of radiotherapy and chemotherapy were associated with worse overall and cancer-specific survival. RCS curves of each stage showed that the relationship between tumor size and prognosis was non-linear. Optimal cut-off points were identified based on the shape of RCS curves, suggesting new classifications of tumor size: 2.5 cm and 5 cm for Ta, 3 cm and 5 cm for T1, and 4 cm and 6 cm for T2. Conclusions: Incorporating tumor size into prognostic evaluations can enhance bladder cancer risk stratification. Further research is needed to validate these findings and improve personalized treatment strategies.
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.