Literature DB >> 17437794

Behavior of urothelial carcinoma with respect to anatomical location.

J W F Catto1, D R Yates, I Rehman, A R Azzouzi, J Patterson, M Sibony, O Cussenot, F C Hamdy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Urothelial carcinoma is a disease of the entire urothelium. Recent molecular insights suggest that the biology of some upper urinary tract and bladder urothelial carcinoma differ. These differences may affect tumor phenotype. Observational studies conflict as to the significance of anatomical location on the behavior of urothelial carcinoma. We compared the biological outcome in a large series of urothelial carcinoma with respect to anatomical location.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed urothelial carcinoma in 425 patients treated at 4 centers according to stage and anatomical location, including the bladder in 275, the ureter in 67 and the renal pelvis in 79. Relapse surveillance was performed for a median of 46 months (range 2 to 216). A separate invasive bladder urothelial carcinoma population was also included to pathologically balance upper and lower tract urothelial carcinoma cases to allow behavioral comparisons.
RESULTS: As a whole, upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma is more invasive and worse differentiated than bladder cancer (chi-square test p<0.0001 and 0.015, respectively). In pathologically matched cohorts recurrence to less aggressive disease, progression to more advanced disease and death occurred in 37%, 40% and 44% of patients with bladder urothelial carcinoma, and in 41%, 44% and 43% of those with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor stage and grade (Cox p=0.0001 and 0.012, respectively) but not location were associated with behavior.
CONCLUSIONS: Urothelial carcinoma behaves identically in the upper and lower urinary tracts when stage and grade are considered. The majority of tumors relapse within 5 years of excision. The current move to minimally invasive/nephron sparing techniques for urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract appears safe. Care could be analogous to that for bladder urothelial carcinoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17437794     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  53 in total

1.  Genomic Characterization of Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.

Authors:  John P Sfakianos; Eugene K Cha; Gopa Iyer; Sasinya N Scott; Emily C Zabor; Ronak H Shah; Qinghu Ren; Aditya Bagrodia; Philip H Kim; A Ari Hakimi; Irina Ostrovnaya; Ricardo Ramirez; Aphrothiti J Hanrahan; Neil B Desai; Arony Sun; Patrizia Pinciroli; Jonathan E Rosenberg; Guido Dalbagni; Nikolaus Schultz; Dean F Bajorin; Victor E Reuter; Michael F Berger; Bernard H Bochner; Hikmat A Al-Ahmadie; David B Solit; Jonathan A Coleman
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Urothelial carcinomas of the upper urinary tract are now recognised as a true and distinct entity from bladder cancer and belong fully to the broad spectrum of onco-urologic neoplasms.

Authors:  Morgan Rouprêt; Pierre Colin
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Expression of steroid hormone receptors and its prognostic significance in urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract.

Authors:  Eiji Kashiwagi; Kazutoshi Fujita; Seiji Yamaguchi; Hiroaki Fushimi; Hiroki Ide; Satoshi Inoue; Taichi Mizushima; Leonardo O Reis; Rajni Sharma; George J Netto; Norio Nonomura; Hiroshi Miyamoto
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 4.742

4.  HAS3 underexpression as an indicator of poor prognosis in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract and urinary bladder.

Authors:  I-Wei Chang; Peir-In Liang; Ching-Chia Li; Wen-Jeng Wu; Chun-Nung Huang; Victor Chia-Hsiang Lin; Chao-Tien Hsu; Hong-Lin He; Ting-Feng Wu; Chih-Hsin Hung; Chien-Feng Li
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-05-02

Review 5.  Prognostic factors and predictive tools for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review.

Authors:  Aurélie Mbeutcha; Morgan Rouprêt; Ashish M Kamat; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Giacomo Novara; Jay D Raman; Christian Seitz; Evanguelos Xylinas; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  CDCA5 overexpression is an indicator of poor prognosis in patients with urothelial carcinomas of the upper urinary tract and urinary bladder.

Authors:  I-Wei Chang; Victor Chia-Hsiang Lin; Hong-Lin He; Chao-Tien Hsu; Ching-Chia Li; Wen-Jeng Wu; Chun-Nung Huang; Ting-Feng Wu; Chien-Feng Li
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 4.060

7.  GPX2 underexpression indicates poor prognosis in patients with urothelial carcinomas of the upper urinary tract and urinary bladder.

Authors:  I-Wei Chang; Victor Chia-Hsiang Lin; Chih-Hsin Hung; Hua-Pin Wang; Yung-Yao Lin; Wen-Jeng Wu; Chun-Nung Huang; Ching-Chia Li; Wei-Ming Li; Jui-Yu Wu; Chien-Feng Li
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  Distinct patterns and behaviour of urothelial carcinoma with respect to anatomical location: how molecular biomarkers can augment clinico-pathological predictors in upper urinary tract tumours.

Authors:  David R Yates; James W F Catto
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 9.  A systematic review of the tools available for predicting survival and managing patients with urothelial carcinomas of the bladder and of the upper tract in a curative setting.

Authors:  Sarah J Drouin; David R Yates; Vincent Hupertan; Olivier Cussenot; Morgan Rouprêt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression in urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis: correlation with clinicopathologic parameters.

Authors:  Laleh Ehsani; Adeboye O Osunkoya
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2014-04-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.