% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Kubik:302858,
      author       = {A. Kubik and I. P. A. das Virgens and N. Varga and A.
                      Szabó and A. Keszthelyi and P. Fehérvári and P. Hegyi and
                      N. Ács and P. Nyirády and T. Szarvas$^*$},
      title        = {{R}adical {S}urgery {C}ompared to {B}ladder-{P}reserving
                      {A}pproaches for {L}imited {S}tage {S}mall-{C}ell {B}ladder
                      {C}ancer: {S}ystematic {R}eview and {M}eta-{A}nalysis.},
      journal      = {Clinical genitourinary cancer},
      volume       = {nn},
      issn         = {1558-7673},
      address      = {Dallas, Tex.},
      publisher    = {CIG Media Group},
      reportid     = {DKFZ-2025-01398},
      pages        = {nn},
      year         = {2025},
      note         = {epub},
      abstract     = {Small-cell bladder cancer (SCBC) is an aggressive and rare
                      malignancy for which there is no clear optimal treatment
                      strategy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to
                      compare the median overall survival (OS) of patients with
                      limited-stage (LS) SCBC treated with either cystectomy-based
                      multimodal therapy (CBMMT) or radiation-based multimodal
                      therapy (RBMMT).A comprehensive search of PUBMED, Embase,
                      and Scopus databases was performed for studies published
                      before January 2024 according to the PRISMA guidelines.
                      Studies have assessed LS-SCBC disease and provided survival
                      data for subgroups of patients undergoing radical surgery or
                      bladder-preserving approaches to be deemed eligible. Data
                      extraction and quality assessment were independently
                      conducted by 2 authors.Five studies comprising 1041 patients
                      were analyzed. The pooled median OS for patients receiving
                      RBMMT was 34.6 months $(95\%$ CI, 25.5-43.7), compared to
                      29.7 months $(95\%$ CI, 18.2-41.1) for those undergoing
                      CBMMT. The main limitations are the retrospective nature of
                      the included studies and the potential bias.This
                      meta-analysis indicates that RBMMT may provide comparable
                      outcomes to CBMMT in LS-SCBC patients, supporting the
                      consideration of bladder-preserving approaches in selected
                      cases. RBMMT may offer a potential clinical benefit in terms
                      of organ preservation for appropriately selected patients,
                      although survival differences were not statistically
                      significant.},
      keywords     = {Bladder cancer (Other) / Chemotherapy (Other) /
                      Neuroendocrine tumor (Other) / Radical cystectomy (Other) /
                      Small-cell tumor (Other)},
      cin          = {ED01},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-He78)ED01-20160331},
      pnm          = {899 - ohne Topic (POF4-899)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-899},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:40664516},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.clgc.2025.102389},
      url          = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/302858},
}