Cited by 123Bladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsUrinary and Genital Oncology StudiesUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research

Longer Wait Times Increase Overall Mortality in Patients With Bladder Cancer

Kulkarni, Girish S., Urbach, David R., Austin, Peter C., Fleshner, Neil E., Laupacis, Andreas·2009·Journal of Urology

Abstract

PURPOSE: We used population level data to determine the impact of extended wait times on the survival of patients who underwent radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 2,535 patients who underwent cystectomy for bladder cancer in Ontario, Canada between 1992 and 2004 using administrative databases. A Cox proportional hazards model accounting for patient, pathological and health services variables that could affect wait times was created to assess the impact of wait time on survival. The tumor stage specific impact of waiting for cystectomy was also assessed. Cox regression analysis that modeled wait time using cubic splines was used to determine a maximum wait time within which optimal care can be provided. RESULTS: Median wait time from transurethral bladder resection to cystectomy was 50 days. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses demonstrated that prolonged wait times were significantly associated with a lower overall survival rate. The relative hazard of death with increasing wait times appeared greater for low stage vs high stage cancers. The cubic splines regression analysis revealed that the risk of death began to increase after 40 days. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment delay between transurethral bladder tumor resection and radical cystectomy resulted in worse overall survival. The effect of wait time was greatest in lower stage lesions. The suggested maximum wait time from transurethral bladder tumor resection to cystectomy was 40 days. Further studies assessing disease-free survival are required to corroborate these findings.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.041

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the Canadian setting, disparity of access to care and inappropriately long wait times are the most concerning issues that threaten patient safety.

    “In our own Canadian setting, disparity of access to care and inappropriately long wait times are the most concerning issues that threaten patient safety [23–26].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 20 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kulkarni, G. S., Urbach, D. R., Austin, P. C., Fleshner, N. E., & Laupacis, A.
Affiliations
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
Venue
Journal of Urology
Published
2009-10
Volume
182
Issue
4
Pages
1318-1324
ISSN
  • 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-3792
OpenAlex
W2031571951
Cited by
123
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 6
FWCI
5.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Urology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Urinary and Genital Oncology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Keywords
bladder cancer, radical cystectomy, treatment delay, waiting time, overall survival, transurethral resection, tumor stage, health care access
MeSH terms
Aged, Urinary Bladder Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Male, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Waiting Lists, Cystectomy, Survival Rate, Survival Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review