Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42369179›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology

Complete pathological response in patients with bladder cancer: predictors and outcomes.

Alireza Ghoreifi, John V Dudinec, Justin M Refugia, Mazyar Zahir, Reza Nabavizadeh, Ankeet M Shah, Michael R Abern

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

7 authors.

Alireza GhoreifiDuke University Department of Urology and Duke Cancer Institute, 40 Duke Medicine Circle, White Zone Room 1562, Durham, NC 27710, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7368-7240
John V DudinecDepartment of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Justin M RefugiaDepartment of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Mazyar ZahirInstitute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Reza NabavizadehDepartment of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Ankeet M ShahDepartment of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Michael R AbernDepartment of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pathologic complete response (pCR) in bladder cancer, most often defined as pT0N0 at radical cystectomy (RC) following transurethral resection of the bladder tumor with/without neoadjuvant therapy, has emerged as a powerful prognostic marker. Predicting pCR before RC and understanding its prognostic nuances are increasingly important as perioperative chemotherapy and immunotherapy evolve. In this study, we reviewed the contemporary evidence regarding definitions and clinical contexts of pCR in bladder cancer; clinical, pathological, imaging, molecular, and liquid-biopsy predictors of pCR; and outcomes and recurrence patterns in patients achieving pCR. We found out that pCR rates vary widely according to treatment regimen, patient selection, and underlying tumor biology, ranging from 5%-15% after transurethral resection alone, 25%-35% with cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and up to 40% with combination chemoimmunotherapy. However, regardless of upfront treatment modality, pCR correlates with significantly improved overall survival and recurrence-free survival. A growing body of evidence has identified predictors of pCR spanning clinical and histopathologic features, molecular and genomic alterations, particularly DNA damage response gene mutations, immune biomarkers (e.g., tumor mutational burden and immune gene expression signatures), advanced imaging with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and vesical imaging reporting and data system-based assessment, and circulating tumor DNA dynamics. Among these, circulating tumor DNA clearance during neoadjuvant therapy has demonstrated particularly strong predictive and prognostic value. Despite the favorable outcomes associated with pCR, recurrence risk is not negligible, especially among ypT0 patients, highlighting the importance of risk-adapted postoperative surveillance. In parallel, bladder-preserving strategies for carefully selected patients achieving a clinical complete response remain investigational, limited by imperfect concordance between clinical and pathologic response and requiring rigorous multimodal assessment and close follow-up. Collectively, contemporary data indicate that no single biomarker is sufficient to reliably predict pCR; rather, integrated multimodal models offer the greatest potential to refine neoadjuvant treatment selection, inform bladder preservation, and individualize surveillance while maintaining oncologic safety.

Indexed as

muscle-invasive bladder cancerneoadjuvant therapypathologic complete responsesurveillancetumor biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID42369179
PMCPMC13305378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.