Literature DB >> 23940135

Clinical significance of micropapillary urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract.

Hyun Hwan Sung1, Junhun Cho, Ghee Young Kwon, Hwang Gyun Jeon, Byong Chang Jeong, Seong Il Seo, Seong Soo Jeon, Han-Yong Choi, Hyun Moo Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to improve understanding of the characteristics of micropapillary urothelial carcinoma (MPUC) in the renal pelvis and ureter, and to compare oncological outcomes between MPUC and non-MPUC.
METHODS: From September 1994 to October 2010, 418 patients underwent nephroureterectomy with bladder excision due to presumed urothelial carcinoma. Pathological review of all specimens was done by one uropathologist. Perioperative data from these patients were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into MPUC and non-MPUC groups. Oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups via progression-free survival (PFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates.
RESULTS: A total of 386 patients were included in the study. Of these, seven patients (1.81%) had MPUC. The median follow-up duration was 39.0 months (IQR range 21.1-70.6). All MPUC patients were men and had lymphovascular invasion, and six patients (85.7%) had grade III and T3 disease. On univariable analysis, MPUC showed significantly worse prognosis with regard to disease progression (p<0.001). In the subgroup analysis confined to T3 or T4 disease, MPUC showed worse prognosis than non-MPUC in terms of PFS and CSS, respectively (p<0.05). In the multivariable model, MPUC still remained a statistically significant independent predictor for PFS (HR (95% CI)=3.85 (1.59-9.32), p=0.003). MPUC was associated with poorer CSS than non-MPUC (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: We have observed that upper tract MPUC is associated with poor oncological outcomes in terms of PFS and CSS. MPUC was an independent prognostic factor for PFS in multivariable analysis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Kidney; Urinary Tract Tumours; Uropathology

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23940135     DOI: 10.1136/jclinpath-2013-201799

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Pathol        ISSN: 0021-9746            Impact factor:   3.411


  4 in total

1.  Outcomes of nonmetastatic micropapillary variant upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Jonathan J Duplisea; Firas G Petros; Roger Li; Bryan Fellman; Charles C Guo; Bogdan A Czerniak; Arlene O Siefker-Radtke; John C Araujo; Colin P N Dinney; Surena F Matin
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-02-16       Impact factor: 3.498

2.  High prevalence of TERT promoter mutations in micropapillary urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Doreen Nguyen; Diana Taheri; Simeon Springer; Morgan Cowan; Gunes Guner; Maria Angelica Mendoza Rodriguez; Yuxuan Wang; Isaac Kinde; Christopher J VandenBussche; Matthew T Olson; Bernardo F P Ricardo; Isabela Cunha; Kazutoshi Fujita; Dilek Ertoy; Kenneth W Kinzler; Trinity J Bivalacqua; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Bert Vogelstein; George J Netto
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 3.  Association between demographic factors and prognosis in urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hyung Suk Kim; Chang Wook Jeong; Cheol Kwak; Hyeon Hoe Kim; Ja Hyeon Ku
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-01-31

Review 4.  Impact of pathological factors on survival in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gopal Sharma; Anuj Kumar Yadav; Tarun Pareek; Pawan Kaundal; Shantanu Tyagi; Sudheer Kumar Devana; Shrawan Kumar Singh
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2022 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.050

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.