Alessandro Veccia1,2, Alessandro Antonelli3, Alberto Martini4,5, Ugo Falagario1,5,6, Giuseppe Carrieri6, Mayer B Grob1, Georgi Guruli1, Claudio Simeone2, Peter Wiklund5, Francesco Porpiglia7, Riccardo Autorino1. 1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, VCU Health System, Richmond, Virginia, USA. 2. Urology Unit, ASST Spedali Civili Hospital, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Science and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 3. Urology Unit AUOI Verona, Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Pediatrics and Gynecology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. 4. Department of Urology, Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. 5. Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, New York, USA. 6. Urology and Renal Transplantation Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy. 7. Department of Urology, "San Luigi Gonzaga" Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prognostic value of tumor location in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Incidence Database, 6619 upper tract urothelial carcinoma cases were identified, including 3719 confined to the renal pelvis and 2971 to the ureter. Predictors of surgical technique (kidney sparing surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy), as well as 2- and 5-year cancer-specific survival and overall survival were evaluated. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 29 months (interquartile range 0-126 months) for both groups. Multivariate logistic analysis showed tumor dimension as the only factor associated with radical nephroureterectomy (odds ratio 1.02; P < 0.001). Ureteral 2- and 5-year overall survival were lower (log-rank P = 0.001) compared with renal pelvis. When stratifying tumor location according to dimensions, a ureteral carcinoma >3 cm was associated with the worst 2- and 5-year cancer-specific mortality (Pepe-Mori P < 0.001), and overall survival (log-rank P < 0.001). The 2- and 5-year cancer-specific mortality (Pepe-Mori P < 0.001) and overall survival were the worst for ureteral ≥T3 tumors (log-rank P < 0.001). The 2- and 5-year cancer-specific mortality (Pepe-Mori P < 0.001) and overall survival (log-rank P < 0.001) were the worst for ureteral grade III-IV cancers. Ureteral tumor location (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.18, P < 0.001), tumor dimension ≥3 (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.25, P < 0.001), T staging (T2-4 all P < 0.001), grading (grade III subdistribution hazard ratio 2.20, P = 0.001; grade IV subdistribution hazard ratio 2.39, P < 0.001) were found to be associated with higher cancer mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Ureteral tumor location in upper tract urothelial carcinoma seems to be associated with worse oncological outcomes, especially in the case of advanced disease. Although the type of surgical treatment does not seem to impact survival, surgeons should use caution in adopting a kidney-sparing surgery for patients with ureteral upper tract urothelial carcinoma.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prognostic value of tumor location in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Incidence Database, 6619 upper tract urothelial carcinoma cases were identified, including 3719 confined to the renal pelvis and 2971 to the ureter. Predictors of surgical technique (kidney sparing surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy), as well as 2- and 5-year cancer-specific survival and overall survival were evaluated. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 29 months (interquartile range 0-126 months) for both groups. Multivariate logistic analysis showed tumor dimension as the only factor associated with radical nephroureterectomy (odds ratio 1.02; P < 0.001). Ureteral 2- and 5-year overall survival were lower (log-rank P = 0.001) compared with renal pelvis. When stratifying tumor location according to dimensions, a ureteral carcinoma >3 cm was associated with the worst 2- and 5-year cancer-specific mortality (Pepe-Mori P < 0.001), and overall survival (log-rank P < 0.001). The 2- and 5-year cancer-specific mortality (Pepe-Mori P < 0.001) and overall survival were the worst for ureteral ≥T3 tumors (log-rank P < 0.001). The 2- and 5-year cancer-specific mortality (Pepe-Mori P < 0.001) and overall survival (log-rank P < 0.001) were the worst for ureteral grade III-IV cancers. Ureteral tumor location (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.18, P < 0.001), tumor dimension ≥3 (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.25, P < 0.001), T staging (T2-4 all P < 0.001), grading (grade III subdistribution hazard ratio 2.20, P = 0.001; grade IV subdistribution hazard ratio 2.39, P < 0.001) were found to be associated with higher cancer mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Ureteral tumor location in upper tract urothelial carcinoma seems to be associated with worse oncological outcomes, especially in the case of advanced disease. Although the type of surgical treatment does not seem to impact survival, surgeons should use caution in adopting a kidney-sparing surgery for patients with ureteral upper tract urothelial carcinoma.
Authors: Tzu Shuang Chen; Yen Ta Chen; Hung Jen Wang; Po Hui Chiang; Wen Chou Yang; Wei Ching Lee; Yao Chi Chuang; Yuan Tso Cheng; Chih Hsiung Kang; Wei Chia Lee; Chien Hsu Chen; Yuan Chi Shen; Yi Yang Liu; Hui Ying Liu; Yin Lun Chang; Yu Li Su; Chun Chieh Huang; Hao Lun Luo Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Wojciech Krajewski; Łukasz Nowak; Bartosz Małkiewicz; Joanna Chorbińska; Paweł Kiełb; Adrian Poterek; Bartłomiej Sporniak; Michał Sut; Marco Moschini; Chiara Lonati; Roberto Carando; Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh; Keiichiro Mori; Krzysztof Kaliszewski; Tomasz Szydełko Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2021-12-14