ArticleMedicine and pharmacy reports2026
Real-world benchmarks for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a single-center analysis of two standard immunotherapy pathways in Romania.
Article in Medicine and pharmacy reports, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To establish a real-world benchmark for treatment with the immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and clinical outcomes for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) by analyzing two distinct, standard-of-care therapeutic sequences at a single Romanian tertiary care center. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 30 patients with mUC treated between January 1, 2020, and April 30, 2025. Patients were analyzed in two clinically distinct cohorts: the Avelumab Maintenance Cohort (N=12), which included platinum-eligible patients who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) followed by avelumab maintenance, and the Pembrolizumab Cohort (N=18), consisting of patients who received pembrolizumab therapy following disease progression after PBC. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and the incidence of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Results: The two cohorts displayed different baseline characteristics and clinical trajectories. The Avelumab Maintenance cohort, selected for chemotherapy-sensitive disease, demonstrated a higher disease control rate (DCR) of 91.7%. The Pembrolizumab cohort, representing a more clinically diverse and challenging population, had a DCR of 55.6%. In the Avelumab cohort, median TTF and median OS were not reached. In the Pembrolizumab cohort, the median TTF was 10.2 months and median OS was 21.8 months. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were infrequent, occurring in 1 of 12 patients (8.3%) in the Avelumab cohort and 2 of 18 patients (11.1%) in the Pembrolizumab cohort, with no new safety signals identified. Conclusion: This single-center study provides a context-specific presentation of mUC treated with ICIs effectiveness and safety in the Romanian healthcare context and highlights the impact of systemic factors, such as national healthcare reimbursement policies, on clinical practice.
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.