SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Oncological Safety of Bladder Preservation in Elderly Patients with Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe oncological safety of bladder preservation therapy (BPT) versus standard radical cystectomy (RC) in elderly patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) remains controversial. MATERIALS AND
methodsAdhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement and Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature review of publications indexed in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases through July 2025. This meta-analysis evaluated the oncological safety of BPT compared with that of RC for the treatment of elderly patients with MIBC. The outcomes were overall survival (OS) rates at 1, 5, and 10 years; cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates at 1 and 5 years; and mortality rates.
resultsOur analysis included 8 studies with a total of 4888 patients, comprising 2534 patients undergoing BPT and 2354 undergoing RC. BPT and RC did not differ significantly in 1-year OS (odds ratio [OR]) 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46, 1.41; p = 0.45), 5-year OS (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.51, 1.36; p = 0.46), 10-year OS (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.24, 4.89; p = 0.91), and 1-year CSS (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.61, 1.04; p = 0.10). However, BPT was inferior in terms of 5-year CSS (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.42, 0.63; p < 0.00001) and exhibited a higher mortality rate (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.24, 3.42; p = 0.005).
conclusionsBPT was proven more favorable for elderly patients when contrasted with those of unstratified age groups. Indirect comparisons within BPT sub-analyses suggest that combining transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT) with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) might yield greater benefits than either treatment alone or in dual combination. Due to high heterogeneity and the retrospective design of included studies, the results should be interpreted with caution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41649780What 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.