INTRODUCTION: Principles of management for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) are mostly derived from knowledge of lower tract urothelial carcinoma (LTUC), however recent research indicates that these may be disparate diseases. In this review, we sought to compare the responsiveness of these tumors to similar treatment, platinum-based chemotherapy used in the adjuvant setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched using a systematic search strategy. Disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with LTUC and UTUC treated with adjuvant chemotherapy were compared. Review Manager V 5.3 was used for meta-analyses. RESULTS: Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved DFS (HR 0.41, 95%CI 0.31-0.54), CSS (HR 0.29, 95%CI 0.17-0.50) and OS (HR 0.51, 95%CI 0.38-0.70) rates in LTUC. The effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy in UTUC was less pronounced with respect to DFS (HR 0.61, 95%CI 0.1-0.93) and CSS (HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.56-0.90) rates, and there was no effect on OS (HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.69-1.10). Differences in CSS and OS were significant (p < 0.0001) in favor of adjuvant chemotherapy for LTUC versus UTUC. CONCLUSION: Despite similar histology, we found significant differences in responsiveness to adjuvant chemotherapy between LTUC and UTUC. This may add to the already growing knowledge that these are disparate diseases. Newer systemic treatments for urothelial carcinoma may prove more effective than platinum-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for UTUC.
INTRODUCTION: Principles of management for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) are mostly derived from knowledge of lower tract urothelial carcinoma (LTUC), however recent research indicates that these may be disparate diseases. In this review, we sought to compare the responsiveness of these tumors to similar treatment, platinum-based chemotherapy used in the adjuvant setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched using a systematic search strategy. Disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with LTUC and UTUC treated with adjuvant chemotherapy were compared. Review Manager V 5.3 was used for meta-analyses. RESULTS: Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved DFS (HR 0.41, 95%CI 0.31-0.54), CSS (HR 0.29, 95%CI 0.17-0.50) and OS (HR 0.51, 95%CI 0.38-0.70) rates in LTUC. The effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy in UTUC was less pronounced with respect to DFS (HR 0.61, 95%CI 0.1-0.93) and CSS (HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.56-0.90) rates, and there was no effect on OS (HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.69-1.10). Differences in CSS and OS were significant (p < 0.0001) in favor of adjuvant chemotherapy for LTUC versus UTUC. CONCLUSION: Despite similar histology, we found significant differences in responsiveness to adjuvant chemotherapy between LTUC and UTUC. This may add to the already growing knowledge that these are disparate diseases. Newer systemic treatments for urothelial carcinoma may prove more effective than platinum-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for UTUC.
Authors: Jeffrey J Leow; William Martin-Doyle; André P Fay; Toni K Choueiri; Steven L Chang; Joaquim Bellmunt Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-03-16 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Nicholas M Donin; Andrew T Lenis; Stuart Holden; Alexandra Drakaki; Allan Pantuck; Arie Belldegrun; Karim Chamie Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ramy F Youssef; Yair Lotan; Arthur I Sagalowsky; Shahrokh F Shariat; Christopher G Wood; Jay D Raman; Cord Langner; Richard Zigeuner; Marco Roscigno; Francesco Montorsi; Christian Bolenz; Wassim Kassouf; Vitaly Margulis Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2013 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.541
Authors: Tanya B Dorff; Denice Tsao-Wei; Gus Miranda; Donald G Skinner; John P Stein; David I Quinn Journal: World J Urol Date: 2008-11-20 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396