ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2025
Advancing Bladder Cancer Management: The Role of Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Therapies and Biomarkers in Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.
Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutraceuticals in Uro-Oncology: A Structured Expert Review and Precision-Oriented Framework.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Favorable pathological response with enfortumab vedotin plus toripalimab as neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-negative muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a case report.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Biomarkers and testing in pathology.Current opinion in urology · 2026Review
- Machine Learning in Biomarker-Driven Precision Oncology: Automated Immunohistochemistry Scoring and Emerging Directions in Genitourinary Cancers.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Immunotherapy role in bladder cancer treatment: a review of literature.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
opinion statementThe management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is evolving rapidly, with the integration of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies and biomarker-driven patient selection now essential to refining treatment decisions. While cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been the standard of care, its underutilization due to toxicity and patient ineligibility underscores the need for alternative strategies. Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies, particularly fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) like enfortumab vedotin (Nectin-4-directed) and disitamab vedotin (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2]-directed), have transformed the management of metastatic urothelial carcinoma and are now being investigated in MIBC. The next challenge is to deploy these agents rationally by using robust biomarkers. FGFR3 alterations are predictive of response to FGFR inhibitors, whereas HER2 over-expression is chiefly prognostic but may also predict benefit from HER2-targeted ADCs. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is both prognostic and predictive, guiding dynamic therapy escalation when positive and potential de-escalation when negative in ongoing perioperative trials. In the adjuvant setting, immune-checkpoint blockade has begun to change practice: nivolumab in CheckMate 274 and pembrolizumab in the Alliance AMBASSADOR study each produced a statistically significant improvement in disease-free survival for high-risk patients after radical cystectomy, with overall survival (OS) data still Maturing. More recently, the phase 3 NIAGARA trial showed that adding perioperative durvalumab to neoadjuvant gemcitabine/cisplatin, followed by surgery and adjuvant durvalumab, conferred significant gains in both event-free survival and OS compared with chemotherapy alone. ctDNA's role as a marker of minimal residual disease is especially compelling. Trials, such as IMvigor010, have laid the foundation for ctDNA's utility as an MRD Marker, while the IMvigor 011 and VOLGA trials are utilizing ctDNA-driven treatment escalation or de-escalation to enable appropriate patient selection. Moving forward, the integration of multi-omics technologies, liquid biopsies, and adaptive trial designs will be crucial in optimizing treatment strategies. Challenges remain in standardizing biomarker assays, validating their predictive value, and translating findings into routine clinical practice. Collaborative efforts and large-scale prospective studies are necessary to bridge existing gaps and advance precision medicine tailored for MIBC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41003886What 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.