ReviewNature reviews. Urology2026
A multi-modal approach for decision making in bladder cancer.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urinary Biomarkers in Urological Oncology: From Biological Origin to Clinical Decision-Making-A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Integrative analysis identifies candidate biomarkers for bladder cancer: evidence from genomic and clinical validation.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Interpretable machine learning model of contrast-enhanced CT radiomics for predicting post-BCG recurrence in high-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- What's next for VI-RADS? Updates and future perspectives from the ACR VI-RADS steering committee.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Review
- Multimodal artificial intelligence in urologic precision oncology: from algorithm to translational medicine (a systemized narrative review).Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bladder cancer remains a major global health challenge, characterized by diagnostic uncertainty, substantial treatment costs and high recurrence rates. Current diagnostic and treatment modalities, including cystoscopy, transurethral resection of bladder tumour and standard histopathology, have limitations, including the inability to detect flat lesions, frequent understaging and interobserver variability, highlighting a crucial need for improved approaches. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI), blue-light cystoscopy, narrow-band imaging, cytology and urinary markers show promise in enhancing early detection and diagnosis. Developments in multiparametric MRI, radiomics, genomics and AI-driven algorithms for histopathological analyses have demonstrated considerable improvements in staging and risk stratification of bladder tumours, enabling personalized therapy selection and prognostication. Despite these promising developments, challenges remain regarding standardization, external validation, cost-effectiveness and ethical considerations in clinical implementation. Future research should prioritize addressing these barriers through collaborative, multi-institutional studies and robust validation frameworks. Ultimately, adopting a comprehensive multimodal strategy, such as proposed, novel, multimodal decision-making frameworks in which these advances and technologies are integrated, promises to considerably advance precision oncology in bladder cancer, improving patient outcomes and reducing health care burdens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41535603What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.