Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41269368›Full record

ArticleClinical & experimental metastasis2025

Time to metastasis as a prognostic factor in metastatic urothelial carcinoma: results from the ARON-2 study.

Renate Pichler, Gerald Klinglmair, Kirstin Binz, Enrique Grande, Alina Pirshtuk, Hideki Takeshita, Yüksel Ürün, Javier Molina-Cerrillo, Zin W Myint, Alfonso Gómez de Liaño and 21 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & experimental metastasis, 2025. 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

31 authors.

Renate PichlerDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center Innsbruck, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Gerald KlinglmairDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center Innsbruck, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Kirstin BinzDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Cancer Center, Overland Park, USA.
Enrique GrandeDepartment of Medical Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Alina PirshtukDepartment of Oncology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, V Uvalu 84, 150 06, Prague, Czech Republic.
Hideki TakeshitaDepartment of Urology, Saitama Medical Center, Saitama Medical University, Kawagoe, Saitama, Japan.
Yüksel ÜrünDepartment of Medical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University, 06620, Ankara, Turkey.
Javier Molina-CerrilloDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
Zin W MyintDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Markey Cancer Center, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.
Alfonso Gómez de LiañoMedical Oncology Department, CHU Insular-Materno Infantil, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
Augusto MotaClínica AMO - Assistência Multidisciplinar em Oncologia, Salvador, Brazil.
Alessia SalfiOncology Unit 2, University Hospital of Pisa, 56126, Pisa, Italy.
Wataru FukuokayaDepartment of Urology, Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Enrico SammarcoMedical Oncology Unit, Livorno Hospital, Azienda Toscana Nord Ovest, 57124, Leghorn, Italy.
Martin AngelClinical Oncology, Genitourinary Oncology Unit, Alexander Fleming Institute, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Jakub KucharzDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Deniz TuralDepartment of Medical Oncology, Koc University Medical Faculty, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ondřej FialaDepartment of Oncology and Radiotherapeutics, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Pilsen, Charles University Prague, Alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Pilsen, Czech Republic. fialao@fnplzen.cz.
Alejo Rodriguez-VidaHospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Franco MorelliMedical Oncology Unit, IRCCS Casa Sollievo Della Sofferenza, Foggia, Italy.
Alexandr PoprachMasaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, Brno, Czech Republic - Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
Mobin SafiU.O. Oncologia, Ospedale C. Urbani, Jesi, Italy.
Alvaro PintoServicio de Oncología, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain.
Francesco MassariMedical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Sebastiano ButiMedical Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Shilpa GuptaTaussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Fernando Sabino Marques MonteiroOncology and Hematology Department, Hospital Sírio Libanês, Brasília, Brazil.
Andrey SoaresLatin American Cooperative Oncology Group - LACOG, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Nicola BattelliMedical Oncology Unit, Macerata Hospital, Macerata, Italy.
Ravindran KanesvaranDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Matteo SantoniMedical Oncology Unit, Macerata Hospital, Macerata, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) may present with metastases at the time of initial diagnosis (synchronous) or develop them during follow-up (metachronous). The impact of the timing of metastasis on the outcome of mUC remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate overall survival (OS) stratified by time to metastasis (TTM) in patients receiving systemic therapy in different lines. Retrospective real-world data from the ARON-2 study were analyzed to compare patient outcomes according to TTM. Cohort 1 included 735 patients receiving first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, Cohort 2 included 1164 patients receiving second-line pembrolizumab, Cohort 3 included 588 patients receiving third-line enfortumab vedotin. TTM (synchronous vs. < 6 months, and ≥ 6 months) significantly influenced overall survival (OS) in Cohort 1 (19.2 vs. 22.3 vs. 27.4 months, p = 0.004) and Cohort 2 (14.6 vs. 15.4 vs. 21.2 months, p = 0.015), but not in Cohort 3. In the multivariable Cox analysis, TTM remained an independent prognostic parameter of poor OS in Cohort 1 (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.27; p = 0.016) and Cohort 2 (HR: 1.12, 95% CI 1.02-1.22; p = 0.014). Our findings suggest that the TTM in mUC significantly influences OS in patients receiving first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and second-line pembrolizumab. The prognostic role of TTM should be considered in the future clinical trial designs.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, Transitional CellUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsUrologic NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisPrognosisRetrospective StudiesAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, Humanizedenfortumab vedotinpembrolizumabChemotherapyEnfortumab vedotinImmunotherapyNCT05290038PembrolizumabTime to metastasisUrothelial Carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID41269368
PMCPMC13242420

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.