MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315697801 · doi:10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_2187_21

Efficacy and adverse reactions of intra-arterial chemotherapy in patients with bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4315697801 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Junjie Ji, Yu Yao, Fengju Guan, Lijiang Sun, Gui-Ming Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisBladder cancerMedicineOncologyChemotherapyAdverse effectInternal medicineUrologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This meta-analysis investigated the efficacies of intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) plus intravesical chemotherapy (IVC) versus IVC alone in patients with non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), and preoperative IAC versus preoperative intravenous chemotherapy (IV) in patients with bladder cancer. We also assessed the adverse reactions (ARs) of IAC. We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for English articles published before April 2021. The qualities of cohort studies and randomized controlled trials were analyzed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, respectively. Effect outcomes were computed by random-effects and fixed-effects models. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata 16.0 and RevMan v5.3.0. A total of seven articles were included. The analysis revealed that IAC plus IVC significantly prolonged recurrence-free survival (RFS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.40–0.76, I 2 = 0%) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.37–0.97, I 2 = 0%) compared with IVC alone in NMIBC patients after transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT), but had no effect on overall survival (OS), tumor recurrence interval, or tumor-specific death rate. Preoperative IAC had no significant OS benefit compared with preoperative IV in bladder cancer patients. Regarding ARs, patients treated with IAC were significantly more likely to develop grade 1–2 ARs, including nausea/vomiting (odds ratio [OR] = 26.38, 95% CI = 1.88–370.79, I 2 = 78%), neutropenia (OR = 10.15, 95% CI = 3.01–34.24, I 2 = 0%), hypoleukemia (OR = 5.49, 95% CI = 1.38–21.82, I 2 = 26%), and increased alanine aminotransferase (OR = 12.28, 95% CI = 2.24–67.43, I 2 = 0%), but there was no significant difference between grade 1–2 ARs and grade 3–4 ARs in terms of increased creatinine in patients treated with IAC. Therefore, administration of IAC plus IVC after TURBT improved RFS and PFS compared with IAC alone in patients with NMIBC. IAC was associated with mild ARs and was well tolerated by most patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cancer Research and TherapeuticsSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207