Literature DB >> 19962727

Gender-related differences in patients with stage I to III upper tract urothelial carcinoma: results from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.

Giovanni Lughezzani1, Maxine Sun, Paul Perrotte, Shahrokh F Shariat, Claudio Jeldres, Lars Budäus, Mathieu Latour, Hugues Widmer, Alain Duclos, Francois Bénard, Michael McCormack, Francesco Montorsi, Pierre I Karakiewicz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effect of gender in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) stage at nephroureterectomy (NU), as well as on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) after NU in patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stages I-III UTUC.
METHODS: Our analyses relied on 2903 (59.9%) males and 1947 (40.1%) females who underwent an NU for pT(1-3)N(0/x)M(0) UTUC between 1988 and 2006, within 17 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models examined the effect of gender on stage and grade distribution at NU. Subsequently, cumulative incidence plots explored the impact of gender on CSM rates, after accounting for other-cause mortality (OCM). Finally, competing-risks regression models tested the independent predictor status of gender in CSM analyses. Covariates consisted of pT stage, pN stage, tumor grade, primary tumor location, type and year of surgery, age, and race.
RESULTS: Relative to males, females had a higher proportion of pT(3) UTUC (43.1% vs 39%; P = .02) and a higher proportion of grade III/IV UTUC (63.8% vs 59.8%; P = .04) at NU. The female gender represented an independent predictor of pT(3) UTUC at NU (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.15; P = .03). After accounting for OCM, CSM rates in females were higher than those in males (HR: 1.18; P = .03). However, in multivariable competing-risks regression models, no statistically significant differences in survival were recorded between males and females (HR: 1.07; P = .4).
CONCLUSIONS: Females are more likely to have more advanced pathologic T stage and higher tumor grade at NU than males. After accounting for OCM, stage, grade, and noncancer characteristics, gender no longer affects CSM. Crown Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19962727     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.09.048

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  36 in total

1.  Combining imaging and ureteroscopy variables in a preoperative multivariable model for prediction of muscle-invasive and non-organ confined disease in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Ricardo L Favaretto; Shahrokh F Shariat; Caroline Savage; Guilherme Godoy; Daher C Chade; Matthew Kaag; Bernard H Bochner; Jonathan Coleman; Guido Dalbagni
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 2.  [Upper tract urothelial carcinoma. An update on clinical and pathological prognostic factors].

Authors:  M Rink; M Adam; J Hansen; F K Chun; S A Ahyai; M Remzi; T Schlomm; O Engel; R Heuer; C Eichelberg; M Fisch; R Dahlem; S F Shariat
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Axel S Merseburger; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-07-21       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: what have we learned in the last 4 years?

Authors:  Mesut Remzi; Shahrokh Shariat; Wilhelm Huebner; Harun Fajkovic; Christian Seitz
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2011-04

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

Review 6.  Prognostic factors for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Thomas F Chromecki; Karim Bensalah; Mesut Remzi; Grégory Verhoest; Eugene K Cha; Douglas S Scherr; Giacomo Novara; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 14.432

7.  Are there differences between de novo and secondary upper tract urothelial carcinoma tumours?

Authors:  Hanan Goldberg; Douglas C Cheung; Thenappan Chandrasekar; Zachary Klaassen; Christopher J D Wallis; Girish S Kulkarni; Rashid Sayyid; Andrew Evans; Mehdi Masoomian; Bharati Bapat; Theodorus van der Kwast; Robert J Hamilton; Alexandre Zlotta; Neil Fleshner
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 1.862

8.  [Elective organ and function preservation in ureter and renal pelvis tumors].

Authors:  S Rausch; G Gakis; J Bedke; A Stenzl
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 0.639

9.  Socio-economic deprivation and outcomes following radical nephroureterectomy for clinically localized upper tract transitional cell carcinoma.

Authors:  R Mehta; A S Gillan; Z Y Ming; B P Rai; D Byrne; G Nabi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Influence of preoperative factors on the oncologic outcome for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma after radical nephroureterectomy.

Authors:  Sophie Hurel; Morgan Rouprêt; Thomas Seisen; Eva Comperat; Véronique Phé; Stéphane Droupy; François Audenet; Géraldine Pignot; Xavier Cathelineau; Laurent Guy; Olivier Cussenot; Adil Ouzzane; Gregory Bozzini; Laurent Nison; Alain Ruffion; Pierre Colin
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.