Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it
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.
2 · The registry
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.
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
5 · Who and what money
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Andrew B KatimsDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-2254-0334
Charlie WhiteDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-1671-3155
Syed Muneeb AlamDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-7854-2967
Mark FarhaDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-3511-2630
Sadra SepehriBrady Urologic Institute, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0009-0003-9620-4699
Manuel De Jesus EscanoDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-6347-4148
Neeta D'SouzaDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0009-0008-7972-8278
Gamze Gokturk OzcanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-4758-2020
Merve BasarDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-7737-2430
Anthony Martinez BenitezDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0009-0006-9471-9922
Melissa McCarterDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0009-0005-7859-8588
Morgan TomberlinDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0009-0000-9979-0556
David B SolitDepartment of Medicine, Genitourinary Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-6614-802X
Gopa IyerDepartment of Medicine, Genitourinary Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-5093-6099
Alvin C GohDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-3092-9024
Timothy F DonahueDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-0932-2968
Judy SarungbamDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-7443-8123
Bernard H BochnerDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-0846-0848
Max KatesBrady Urologic Institute, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0003-1166-7225
Irina OstrovnayaDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-1783-0070
Hikmat Al-AhmadieDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-2938-6627
Oscar LinDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-2089-6118
Eugene J PietzakDepartment of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-5121-5701
Funding
X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
SPORE in Bladder CancerP50CA221745 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI BAJORIN, DEAN F. · 2018 to 2024
$11.8M
Defining Mechanisms of Progression and Treatment Resistance in Localized Bladder CancerR37CA276946 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI Eugene Pietzak · 2023 to 2026
$2.0M
Center for Cancer Research (CCR) R37CA276946NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P50 CA221745NCI NIH HHS R37 CA276946Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers (Sidney Kimmel Center)
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether carcinoma in situ (CIS) is a sufficient measure of minimal residual disease (MRD) in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and evaluate alternative measures of MRD. EXPERIMENTAL
designWe evaluated the concordance of CIS on transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) and radical cystectomy (RC) to determine eradication rates of clinical CIS (cCIS) by TURBT alone and rates of occult pathologic CIS (pCIS) seen only in RC specimens. We studied a prospective cohort of patients with BCG-naïve high-grade NMIBC to evaluate pretreatment urinary cytology and urinary tumor (ut)DNA as alternative biomarkers.
resultsEradication of CIS was seen in 20% of patients (78/383). Positive urinary cytology, but not cCIS, was associated with pCIS. In our prospective cohort (n = 173), abnormal pre-BCG urine cytology, but not pre-BCG cCIS, had worse high-grade recurrence-free survival [HG-RFS; hazard ratio, 3.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.74-7.31, P < 0.001]. The median follow-up was 1.8 years (95% CI, 1.3-2.2). Among those with utDNA available, 84% (56/67) had sufficient DNA for genomic profiling. The 2-year HG-RFS rate in patients without an oncogenic alteration (n = 17) in their pre-BCG urine was 100% versus 60% (95% CI, 46%-78%) in patients with detectable oncogenic alterations (n = 38; P = 0.004). Area under the curve values for predicting 2-year HG-RFS were 0.52 for cCIS, 0.68 for cytology, and 0.74 for utDNA.
conclusionsWe found ∼20% eradication of cCIS from TURBT alone. cCIS was a poor metric of MRD, performing worse than abnormal pretreatment urinary cytology and utDNA. These urine biomarkers are more objective MRD measures than cCIS for NMIBC risk stratification and treatment assessment.
Indexed as
Biomarkers, TumorCarcinoma in SituNeoplasm, ResidualNon-Muscle Invasive Bladder NeoplasmsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overCystectomyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProspective StudiesTransurethral Resection of BladderBiomarkers, Tumor
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.
Urinary Biomarkers Objectively Measure Minimal Residual Disease in Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. · full record | OpenQuestion