ReviewIranian journal of microbiology2026
Updated oncolytic viruses for the treatment of bladder cancer: a systematic review.
Review in Iranian journal of microbiology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Bladder cancer (BCa) is the most prevalent malignancy of the urinary tract and is often diagnosed at a late stage. Recurrence remains a major challenge for current treatment strategies. Over the past decade, the antitumor potential of oncolytic viruses (OVs) has been increasingly recognized, with several studies evaluating their safety and efficacy in BCa treatment. In this systematic review, we present clinical trials and animal studies to comprehensively evaluate the safety and therapeutic efficiency of various OVs in BCa. Materials and Methods: After receiving the PROSPERO registration code, four electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, were systematically searched to identify studies evaluating the safety and treatment potential of OVs in BCa. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening process, and data from clinical trials and animal studies were systematically extracted into Excel for subsequent synthesis and reporting. All steps of this systematic review adhered to the guidelines outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, upholding high standards of methodological rigor and transparency. Results: The initial search strategy yielded 1,061 records. After removing duplicates, 809 articles were screened for relevance. Following the exclusion of 761 studies, 48 were deemed eligible for data extraction, comprising 17 clinical trials and 29 animal studies. Various oncolytic viruses were investigated, either as monotherapies or in combination with other agents, including Vaccinia virus, Adenovirus, Oncolytic adenovirus ONYX, Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21), oncolytic CVA21 (V937), attenuated measles virus (MV-NIS virus), recombinant adenovirus (rAd), and a serotype 5 adenovirus engineered to express GM-CSF. All studies reported their most effective doses administered within safe parameters. Conclusion: The common virus was the non-replicative recombinant adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5), which encodes human interferon alfa-2b (IFNα2b) a cytokine with anti-tumor properties. It is administered via intravesical instillation and has received FDA approval.
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.