Jing Xie1, Xue-Bin Zhang1, Jin Wen1, Yu-Shi Zhang1, Han-Zhong Li2. 1. Department of Urology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shuaifuyuan No. 1, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, China. 2. Department of Urology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shuaifuyuan No. 1, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, China. lihzhx@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the characteristics of primary tumors, sites distribution of metastases and the metastasis-free interval (MFI) between metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and urothelial bladder cancer (UBC), and evaluate the clinicopathological factors associated with MFI. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 153 metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients consecutively registered at our hospital from 1997 to 2015, including 71 UTUC and 82 UBC, with a median follow-up of 18.3 months. MFI indicators were assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: There were significant differences in median age at metastatic disease (p = 0.016), gender (p = 0.018), primary tumor size (p = 0.003), growth pattern (p < 0.001), grade (p < 0.001) and stage (p < 0.001) between metastatic UTUC and UBC. The median MFI of UTUC was dramatically shorter than that of UBC (6.1 vs. 17.4 months, p < 0.001). Univariate analysis revealed pathological stage was the only factor associated with the MFI of UTUC. Multivariate analysis showed that primary tumor grade was an independent inferior predictor for the MFI of UBC (HR 6.384, 95% CI 3.21-12.69, p < 0.001), while recurrence was an independent favorable factor for the MFI of UBC (HR 0.384, 95% CI 0.18-0.82, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to metastatic UBC, the primary tumors of metastatic UTUC were more invasive and the MFI was significantly shorter. Pathological stage was the only factor associated with the MFI in UTUC, while primary tumor grade and recurrence were independent factors for the MFI of UBC.
PURPOSE: To compare the characteristics of primary tumors, sites distribution of metastases and the metastasis-free interval (MFI) between metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and urothelial bladder cancer (UBC), and evaluate the clinicopathological factors associated with MFI. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 153 metastatic urothelial carcinomapatients consecutively registered at our hospital from 1997 to 2015, including 71 UTUC and 82 UBC, with a median follow-up of 18.3 months. MFI indicators were assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: There were significant differences in median age at metastatic disease (p = 0.016), gender (p = 0.018), primary tumor size (p = 0.003), growth pattern (p < 0.001), grade (p < 0.001) and stage (p < 0.001) between metastatic UTUC and UBC. The median MFI of UTUC was dramatically shorter than that of UBC (6.1 vs. 17.4 months, p < 0.001). Univariate analysis revealed pathological stage was the only factor associated with the MFI of UTUC. Multivariate analysis showed that primary tumor grade was an independent inferior predictor for the MFI of UBC (HR 6.384, 95% CI 3.21-12.69, p < 0.001), while recurrence was an independent favorable factor for the MFI of UBC (HR 0.384, 95% CI 0.18-0.82, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to metastatic UBC, the primary tumors of metastatic UTUC were more invasive and the MFI was significantly shorter. Pathological stage was the only factor associated with the MFI in UTUC, while primary tumor grade and recurrence were independent factors for the MFI of UBC.
Authors: Michael Rink; Behfar Ehdaie; Eugene K Cha; David A Green; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Marko Babjuk; Vitaly Margulis; Jay D Raman; Robert S Svatek; Harun Fajkovic; Richard K Lee; Giacomo Novara; Jens Hansen; Siamak Daneshmand; Yair Lotan; Wassim Kassouf; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Armin Pycha; Margit Fisch; Douglas S Scherr; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Atul B Shinagare; Nikhil H Ramaiya; Jyothi P Jagannathan; Fiona M Fennessy; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Annick D Van den Abbeele Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: James W F Catto; Abdel-Rahmene Azzouzi; Ishtiaq Rehman; Kenneth M Feeley; Simon S Cross; Najla Amira; Gaelle Fromont; Mathilde Sibony; Oliver Cussenot; Mark Meuth; Freddie C Hamdy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-03-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Yves Hüsemann; Jochen B Geigl; Falk Schubert; Piero Musiani; Manfred Meyer; Elke Burghart; Guido Forni; Roland Eils; Tanja Fehm; Gert Riethmüller; Christoph A Klein Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Elizabeth M Genega; Malathy Kapali; Marta Torres-Quinones; William C Huang; Jill S Knauss; Li-Ping Wang; Puthiyaveettil N Raghunath; Christopher Kozlowski; Stanley Bruce Malkowicz; John E Tomaszewski Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 7.842