ReviewCancers2025
The Management of Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond staging: toward a layered risk architecture after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Clinical and pathological predictors of early recurrence after neoadjuvant cisplatin gemcitabine in muscle invasive bladder cancer in the RealBLADDER study.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMuscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) represents a highly aggressive malignancy associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The current standard treatment, which includes radical cystectomy and platinum-based chemotherapy, is burdened by high toxicity and a substantial risk of relapse. For this reason, over the past decade, novel therapeutic strategies involving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and targeted therapies have been investigated. This review aims to summarize current clinical evidence and ongoing trials evaluating these approaches in the perioperative setting.
methodsA systematic search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, along with abstracts from major oncology conferences (ASCO, ESMO, SGO). Clinical trials assessing ICIs, ADCs, and targeted therapies, either alone or in combination with each other or with chemotherapy, in MIBC, were included.
resultsSeveral early-phase and phase III trials have investigated the perioperative management of MIBC. Various studies evaluated the addition of ICIs to standard chemotherapy, demonstrating promising results in terms of pathological complete response. In parallel, the encouraging outcomes with ICIs and ADCs alone in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting paved the way for their combination in integrated strategies. Biomarker-driven approaches, based on circulating tumor DNA and specific genomic alterations, are being actively explored to improve patient selection and personalize treatment.
conclusionsICIs, ADCs, and targeted therapies are reshaping the therapeutic landscape of MIBC. While early results are promising, further data and biomarker validation are essential to establish their definitive role and guide clinical decision-making in the perioperative setting.
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.