Nawar Hanna1, Quoc-Dien Trinh1, Thomas Seisen1, Malte W Vetterlein1, Jesse Sammon2, Mark A Preston1, Stuart R Lipsitz1, Joaquim Bellmunt3, Mani Menon2, Toni K Choueiri4, Firas Abdollah5. 1. Division of Urological Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Vattikuti Institute of Urology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: toni_choueiri@dfci.harvard.edu. 5. Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Vattikuti Institute of Urology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA. Electronic address: firas.abdollah@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) before radical cystectomy (RC) is supported by results from several randomized control trials, including SWOG-8710. OBJECTIVE: To look at the effectiveness of NAC before RC in current real world practice in the USA. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to identify patients with nonmetastatic muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder who underwent RC between 2004 and 2012. INTERVENTION: Receipt of NAC before RC. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were rates of complete pathologic response (pT0), positive pathologic lymph nodes (pN+), and margin status. Using a landmark analysis to adjust for an immortal-time bias, OS comparison was performed using Cox regression analysis. Furthermore, logistic regression models examining secondary outcomes were fitted. To adjust for potential selection bias, propensity score-weighted analyses were performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 8732 patients who underwent RC, 1619 (19%) received NAC. Following propensity score adjustment, receipt of NAC was not associated with an OS benefit (hazard ratio 0.97; p=0.591). On secondary outcome analysis, higher pT0 rates (odds ratio 5.03; p<0.001) were recorded among patients who received NAC, although rates of pT0 were lower than for patients treated with NAC within the SWOG-8710 trial (13% vs 38%). Limitations include the retrospective design and limited details available regarding type of chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Important baseline differences between patients from the SWOG-8710 trial and those in general urologic practice exist. After adjusting for immortal-time bias, we did not find a clear survival advantage of NAC before RC when compared to RC alone in current general urology practice in the USA. PATIENT SUMMARY: The benefit of chemotherapy before radical cystectomy is supported by few randomized control trials. In this study, using a large national data set from the USA we found that preoperative chemotherapy is not associated with a survival benefit in all patients in general urology practice. Hence, better selection criteria are needed to determine who will benefit the most from chemotherapy before radical cystectomy.
BACKGROUND: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) before radical cystectomy (RC) is supported by results from several randomized control trials, including SWOG-8710. OBJECTIVE: To look at the effectiveness of NAC before RC in current real world practice in the USA. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to identify patients with nonmetastatic muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder who underwent RC between 2004 and 2012. INTERVENTION: Receipt of NAC before RC. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were rates of complete pathologic response (pT0), positive pathologic lymph nodes (pN+), and margin status. Using a landmark analysis to adjust for an immortal-time bias, OS comparison was performed using Cox regression analysis. Furthermore, logistic regression models examining secondary outcomes were fitted. To adjust for potential selection bias, propensity score-weighted analyses were performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 8732 patients who underwent RC, 1619 (19%) received NAC. Following propensity score adjustment, receipt of NAC was not associated with an OS benefit (hazard ratio 0.97; p=0.591). On secondary outcome analysis, higher pT0 rates (odds ratio 5.03; p<0.001) were recorded among patients who received NAC, although rates of pT0 were lower than for patients treated with NAC within the SWOG-8710 trial (13% vs 38%). Limitations include the retrospective design and limited details available regarding type of chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Important baseline differences between patients from the SWOG-8710 trial and those in general urologic practice exist. After adjusting for immortal-time bias, we did not find a clear survival advantage of NAC before RC when compared to RC alone in current general urology practice in the USA. PATIENT SUMMARY: The benefit of chemotherapy before radical cystectomy is supported by few randomized control trials. In this study, using a large national data set from the USA we found that preoperative chemotherapy is not associated with a survival benefit in all patients in general urology practice. Hence, better selection criteria are needed to determine who will benefit the most from chemotherapy before radical cystectomy.
Authors: Albert Font; Montserrat Domenech; Oscar Buisan; Hector Lopez; Andrea González; Olatz Etxaniz; Marta Matas; Xavier Elias; Maica Gomez; Mariona Figols; Judith Horneros; Juan Carlos Pardo; Lucia Notario; Vicenç Ruiz de Porras; Ignacio Perez; Joan Areal; Anna Esteve Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-09-15 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Giuseppe Rosiello; Angela Pecoraro; Carlotta Palumbo; Sophie Knipper; Stefano Luzzago; Marina Deuker; Zhe Tian; Giorgio Gandaglia; Nicola Fossati; Francesco Montorsi; Shahrokh F Shariat; Fred Saad; Alberto Briganti; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-05-18 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Benedikt Hoeh; Rocco Simone Flammia; Lukas Hohenhorst; Gabriele Sorce; Francesco Chierigo; Andrea Panunzio; Zhe Tian; Fred Saad; Michele Gallucci; Alberto Briganti; Carlo Terrone; Shahrokh F Shariat; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki; Alessandro Antonelli; Luis A Kluth; Philipp Mandel; Felix K H Chun; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-26 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Frederik König; Benjamin Pradere; Nico C Grossmann; Fahad Quhal; Pawel Rajwa; Ekaterina Laukhtina; Keiichiro Mori; Satoshi Katayama; Takafumi Yanagisawa; Hadi Mostafai; Reza Sari Motlagh; Abdulmajeed Aydh; Roland Dahlem; Shahrokh F Shariat; Michael Rink Journal: Transl Cancer Res Date: 2022-04 Impact factor: 1.241
Authors: Katarzyna Gronostaj; Anna Katarzyna Czech; Jakub Fronczek; Tomasz Wiatr; Mikołaj Przydacz; Przemysław Dudek; Łukasz Curyło; Wojciech Szczeklik; Piotr Chłosta Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2020-02-27
Authors: Lara Franziska Stolzenbach; Marina Deuker; Claudia Collà-Ruvolo; Luigi Nocera; Zhe Tian; Tobias Maurer; Derya Tilki; Alberto Briganti; Fred Saad; Vincenzo Mirone; Felix K H Chun; Markus Graefen; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-11-05 Impact factor: 4.226