ArticleCureus2025
Reassessing Cisplatin Eligibility in Urothelial Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study on Dose Reduction Strategies.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background This study aims to assess the impact of reduced cisplatin doses on treatment efficacy and toxicity in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC) and renal impairment. Current guidelines suggest excluding patients with renal impairment from cisplatin treatment. However, reevaluating the efficacy of dose-adjusted cisplatin based on renal function is crucial. Methods A retrospective study was conducted on 68 patients diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic UC (T2-4N0M0, TanyN1-3M0 or TanyNanyM1) between 2017 and 2024. These patients were divided into two groups: 40 received a full dose (100%) of cisplatin (CDDP:70-135mg) and 28 received a 75% dose (CDDP:60-120mg). Clinical outcomes and adverse effects were analyzed and compared between these two groups, with a particular focus on patients with renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 50-60). Results Complete response (CR) rates were 15.0% for the full-dose group and 14.3% for the 75% dose group, while partial response (PR) rates were 35.0% and 42.9%, respectively. The overall response rates (CR + PR) were 50.0% for the full dose and 57.2% for the 75% dose. For patients with renal impairment, the 75% dose group demonstrated similar efficacy and adverse effect profiles compared to the full-dose group. Conclusions The findings suggest that reduced doses of cisplatin, based on renal function, do not compromise treatment efficacy in UC patients. Thus, expanding cisplatin eligibility to include UC patients with renal impairment (eGFR 30-60 mL/min) is warranted, indicating that dose-adjusted cisplatin treatment is a viable option.
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.