Impact of Tumor Location on Prognosis for Patients with Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Managed by Radical Nephroureterectomy

Abstract Background There is a lack of consensus regarding the prognostic significance of ureteral versus renal pelvic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Objective To investigate the association of tumor location on outcomes for UTUC in an international cohort of patients managed by radical ne...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European urology 2010-06, Vol.57 (6), p.1072-1079
Hauptverfasser: Raman, Jay D, Ng, Casey K, Scherr, Douglas S, Margulis, Vitaly, Lotan, Yair, Bensalah, Karim, Patard, Jean-Jacques, Kikuchi, Eiji, Montorsi, Francesco, Zigeuner, Richard, Weizer, Alon, Bolenz, Christian, Koppie, Theresa M, Isbarn, Hendrik, Jeldres, Claudio, Kabbani, Wareef, Remzi, Mesut, Waldert, Mathias, Wood, Christopher G, Roscigno, Marco, Oya, Mototsuga, Langner, Cord, Wolf, J. Stuart, Ströbel, Philipp, Fernández, Mario, Karakiewcz, Pierre, Shariat, Shahrokh F
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Background There is a lack of consensus regarding the prognostic significance of ureteral versus renal pelvic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Objective To investigate the association of tumor location on outcomes for UTUC in an international cohort of patients managed by radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Design, setting, and participants A retrospective review of institutional databases from 10 institutions worldwide identified patients with UTUC. Intervention The 1249 patients in the study underwent RNU with ipsilateral bladder cuff resection between 1987 and 2007. Measurements Data accrued included age, gender, race, surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic), tumor pathology (stage, grade, lymph node status), tumor location, use of perioperative chemotherapy, prior endoscopic therapy, urothelial carcinoma recurrence, and mortality from urothelial carcinoma. Tumor location was divided into two groups (renal pelvis and ureter) based on the location of the dominant tumor. Results and limitations The 5-yr recurrence-free and cancer-specific survival estimates for this cohort were 75% and 78%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, only pathologic tumor (pT) classification ( p < 0.001), grade ( p < 0.02), and lymph node status ( p < 0.001) were associated with disease recurrence and cancer-specific survival. When adjusting for these variables, there was no difference in the probability of disease recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.22; p = 0.133) or cancer death (HR: 1.23; p = 0.25) between ureteral and renal pelvic tumors. Adding tumor location to a base prognostic model for disease recurrence and cancer death that included pT stage, tumor grade, and lymph node status only improved the predictive accuracy of this model by 0.1%. This study is limited by biases associated with its retrospective design. Conclusions There is no difference in outcomes between patients with renal pelvic tumors and with ureteral tumors following nephroureterectomy. These data support the current TNM staging system, whereby renal pelvic and ureteral carcinomas are classified as one integral group of tumors.
ISSN:0302-2838
1873-7560
1421-993X
DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2009.07.002