Malte W Vetterlein1, Philipp Gild1, Luis A Kluth1, Thomas Seisen2, Michael Gierth3, Hans-Martin Fritsche3, Maximilian Burger3, Chris Protzel4, Oliver W Hakenberg4, Nicolas von Landenberg5, Florian Roghmann5, Joachim Noldus5, Philipp Nuhn6, Armin Pycha7,8, Michael Rink1, Felix K-H Chun1, Matthias May9, Margit Fisch1, Atiqullah Aziz4. 1. Department of Urology, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 2. Department of Urology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Pierre and Marie Curie University, Paris, France. 3. Department of Urology, Caritas St. Josef Medical Centre, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 4. Department of Urology, University Medical Centre Rostock, Rostock, Germany. 5. Department of Urology, Marien Hospital Herne, Ruhr-University Bochum, Herne, Germany. 6. Department of Urology, Mannheim Medical Centre, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany. 7. Department of Urology, Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy. 8. Centre for Urology and Nephrology, Faculty of Medicine, Sigmund Freud University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 9. Department of Urology, St. Elisabeth Medical Centre, Straubing, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of peri-operative blood transfusion (PBT) on recurrence-free survival, overall survival, cancer-specific mortality and other-cause mortality in patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC), using a contemporary European multicentre cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Prospective Multicentre Radical Cystectomy Series (PROMETRICS) includes data on 679 patients who underwent RC at 18 European tertiary care centres in 2011. The association between PBT and oncological survival outcomes was assessed using Kaplan-Meier, Cox regression and competing-risks analyses. Imbalances in clinicopathological features between patients receiving PBT vs those not receiving PBT were mitigated using conventional multivariable adjusting as well as inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: Overall, 611 patients had complete information on PBT, and 315 (51.6%) received PBT. The two groups (PBT vs no PBT) differed significantly with respect to most clinicopathological features, including peri-operative blood loss: median (interquartile range [IQR]) 1000 (600-1500) mL vs 500 (400-800) mL (P < 0.001). Independent predictors of receipt of PBT in multivariable logistic regression analysis were female gender (odds ratio [OR] 5.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.62-9.71; P < 0.001), body mass index (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95; P < 0.001), type of urinary diversion (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.82; P = 0.013), blood loss (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.23-1.40; P < 0.001), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.37-5.00; P = 0.004), and ≥pT3 tumours (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.02-2.48; P = 0.041). In 531 patients with complete data on survival outcomes, unweighted and unadjusted survival analyses showed worse overall survival, cancer-specific mortality and other-cause mortality rates for patients receiving PBT(P < 0.001, P = 0.017 and P = 0.001, respectively). After IPTW adjustment, those differences no longer held true. PBT was not associated with recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.53-1.58; P = 0.8), overall survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55-2.05; P = 0.9), cancer-specific mortality (sub-HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.62-1.92; P = 0.8) and other-cause mortality (sub-HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.26-3.85; P > 0.9) in IPTW-adjusted Cox regression and competing-risks analyses. The same held true in conventional multivariable Cox and competing-risks analyses, where PBT could not be confirmed as a predictor of any given endpoint (all P values >0.05). CONCLUSION: The present results did not show an adverse effect of PBT on oncological outcomes after adjusting for baseline differences in patient characteristics.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of peri-operative blood transfusion (PBT) on recurrence-free survival, overall survival, cancer-specific mortality and other-cause mortality in patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC), using a contemporary European multicentre cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Prospective Multicentre Radical Cystectomy Series (PROMETRICS) includes data on 679 patients who underwent RC at 18 European tertiary care centres in 2011. The association between PBT and oncological survival outcomes was assessed using Kaplan-Meier, Cox regression and competing-risks analyses. Imbalances in clinicopathological features between patients receiving PBT vs those not receiving PBT were mitigated using conventional multivariable adjusting as well as inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: Overall, 611 patients had complete information on PBT, and 315 (51.6%) received PBT. The two groups (PBT vs no PBT) differed significantly with respect to most clinicopathological features, including peri-operative blood loss: median (interquartile range [IQR]) 1000 (600-1500) mL vs 500 (400-800) mL (P < 0.001). Independent predictors of receipt of PBT in multivariable logistic regression analysis were female gender (odds ratio [OR] 5.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.62-9.71; P < 0.001), body mass index (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95; P < 0.001), type of urinary diversion (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.82; P = 0.013), blood loss (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.23-1.40; P < 0.001), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.37-5.00; P = 0.004), and ≥pT3 tumours (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.02-2.48; P = 0.041). In 531 patients with complete data on survival outcomes, unweighted and unadjusted survival analyses showed worse overall survival, cancer-specific mortality and other-cause mortality rates for patients receiving PBT(P < 0.001, P = 0.017 and P = 0.001, respectively). After IPTW adjustment, those differences no longer held true. PBT was not associated with recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.53-1.58; P = 0.8), overall survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55-2.05; P = 0.9), cancer-specific mortality (sub-HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.62-1.92; P = 0.8) and other-cause mortality (sub-HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.26-3.85; P > 0.9) in IPTW-adjusted Cox regression and competing-risks analyses. The same held true in conventional multivariable Cox and competing-risks analyses, where PBT could not be confirmed as a predictor of any given endpoint (all P values >0.05). CONCLUSION: The present results did not show an adverse effect of PBT on oncological outcomes after adjusting for baseline differences in patient characteristics.
Authors: Yannic Volz; Lennert Eismann; Paulo L Pfitzinger; Jan-Friedrich Jokisch; Alexander Buchner; Boris Schlenker; Christian G Stief; Gerald B Schulz Journal: Arab J Urol Date: 2020-12-10