ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2025
Survival After Partial Cystectomy Versus Radical Cystectomy for Non-Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder: A Population-Based Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- TURBT versus RC in T1N0M0 non-urothelial bladder cancer: a population-based study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
Background: The aim of this study was to compare cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) after partial cystectomy (PC) versus radical cystectomy (RC) in patients with stage T2N0M0 non-urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (NUCB). Methods: Data on patients with stage T2N0M0 NUCB treated with PC or RC were retrospectively retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 2007 to 2015. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to create matched cohorts, which were used to calculate OS and CSS. Results: Among 999 histologically confirmed NUCB patients (752 in PC group and 247 in RC group), significant differences were found in age, marital status, tumor-related features, and treatment modalities. After 1:1 PSM, 169 pairs were obtained. In the matched cohort, the RC group had significantly higher 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS and CSS rates than the PC group (OS: P = 0.002; CSS: P = 0.004). Cox regression analysis showed that older age, unmarried status, and PC were independent risk factors for poor prognosis, while RC was associated with improved survival (OS: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.26 - 0.44, P < 0.001; CSS: HR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.31 - 0.72, P < 0.001). T2b-stage patients had lower cancer-specific mortality than T2a-stage patients (P = 0.01). Subgroup analysis indicated that RC generally led to better survival, except in the neuroendocrine carcinoma subgroup for OS (P = 0.085) and the other carcinoma subgroup for CSS (P = 0.132). Conclusions: This study reveals that RC is associated with superior CSS and OS compared to PC in patients with NUCB. Patient-related factors (age and marital status) and histological subtype significantly influence prognosis, highlighting the need for 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.