ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and combined chemotherapy with immunotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessing clinical complete response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Choosing neoadjuvant therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer based on efficacy-safety trade-off: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) compared to NAC combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to assess the impact of these two treatment regimens on the pathological complete response rate (pCR) and overall survival (OS).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 320 MIBC patients treated at the Cancer Hospital affiliated to Sun Yat-sen University Gansu Hospital between January 2017 and June 2022. Patients were categorized into the NAC group (n=194) and the NAC+ICI group (n=126) based on their treatment regimens. After PSM, 154 patients were included, with 77 in each group. Baseline characteristics, clinical efficacy, and prognosis were analyzed using various statistical methods.
resultsBefore PSM, significant differences were observed between the groups in baseline characteristics, including tumor diameter, tumor number, and adjuvant treatment (all P<0.05). After PSM, these differences were no longer statistically significant (all P>0.05). The NAC+ICI group demonstrated a significantly higher pCR rate both before and after PSM (both P<0.001). Similarly, pathological downstaging rates were higher in the NAC+ICI group before and after PSM (both P<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in disease control rates between the two groups before (P=0.057) and after PSM (P=0.240). Logistic regression analysis identified the treatment regimen (before PSM: P<0.001, OR=0.161; after PSM: P<0.001, OR=0.141) and complications (before PSM: P=0.005, OR=2.339; after PSM: P=0.019, OR=2.753) as independent risk factors for pCR. Cox regression analysis revealed that age (before PSM: P<0.001, HR=1.059; after PSM: P=0.011, HR=1.066), pretreatment T stage (before PSM: P<0.001, HR=2.342; after PSM: P<0.001, HR=3.244), tumor diameter (before PSM: P=0.005, HR=1.810; after PSM: P=0.025, HR=2.077), and treatment outcome (before PSM: P<0.001, HR=1.722; after PSM: P=0.020, HR=1.444) were independent prognostic factors for OS.
conclusionNAC combined with ICI significantly improves pCR and pathological downstaging rates in MIBC patients. Independent prognostic factors affecting OS include age, pretreatment T stage, tumor diameter, and treatment outcome.
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.