Keiichiro Mori1,2, Takafumi Yanagisawa1,2, Satoshi Katayama1,3, Ekaterina Laukhtina1,4, Benjamin Pradere1, Hadi Mostafaei1,5, Fahad Quhal1,6, Pawel Rajwa1,7, Marco Moschini8, Francesco Soria9, David D'andrea1, Mohammad Abufaraj1,10, Simone Albisinni11, Wojciech Krajewski12, Wataru Fukuokaya2, Jun Miki2, Takahiro Kimura2, Shin Egawa2, Jeremy Yc Teoh13, Shahrokh F Shariat14,15,16,17,18,19,20. 1. Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. 3. Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan. 4. Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia. 5. Research Center for Evidence Based Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 6. Department of Urology, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia. 7. Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland. 8. Department of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. 9. Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy. 10. Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. 11. Department of Urology, University Clinics of Brussels, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. 12. Department of Department of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, Wrocław Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland. 13. Department of Surgery, S.H. Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 14. Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at. 15. Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at. 16. Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at. 17. Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at. 18. Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at. 19. Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at. 20. Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic value of sex for non-muscle-invasive/muscle-invasive bladder urothelial carcinoma (NMIBC/MIBC) treated with radical surgery. METHODS: The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched in November 2021 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement. Studies were deemed eligible if they involved the comparison of the overall, cancer-specific, progression, and recurrence-free survival of patients with NMIBC/MIBC. Formal sex-stratified meta-analyses of these outcomes were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies, which included 32,525 patients with NMIBC, and 63 studies, which included 85,132 patients with MIBC, were eligible for review and meta-analysis. Female sex was associated with worse cancer-specific survival (pooled hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.31) and overall survival (pooled HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05) in patients with MIBC. In contrast, however, sex was not associated with cancer-specific survival (pooled HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.70-1.46), progression-free survival (pooled HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.24), and recurrence-free survival (pooled HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.98-1.16) in patients with NMIBC. CONCLUSIONS: Sex is associated with an increased risk of worse survival outcomes in patients with MIBC but not in those with NMIBC. Given the genetic and social differences between sexes, sex may represent a key factor in the clinical decision-making process.
PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic value of sex for non-muscle-invasive/muscle-invasive bladder urothelial carcinoma (NMIBC/MIBC) treated with radical surgery. METHODS: The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched in November 2021 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement. Studies were deemed eligible if they involved the comparison of the overall, cancer-specific, progression, and recurrence-free survival of patients with NMIBC/MIBC. Formal sex-stratified meta-analyses of these outcomes were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies, which included 32,525 patients with NMIBC, and 63 studies, which included 85,132 patients with MIBC, were eligible for review and meta-analysis. Female sex was associated with worse cancer-specific survival (pooled hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.31) and overall survival (pooled HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05) in patients with MIBC. In contrast, however, sex was not associated with cancer-specific survival (pooled HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.70-1.46), progression-free survival (pooled HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.24), and recurrence-free survival (pooled HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.98-1.16) in patients with NMIBC. CONCLUSIONS: Sex is associated with an increased risk of worse survival outcomes in patients with MIBC but not in those with NMIBC. Given the genetic and social differences between sexes, sex may represent a key factor in the clinical decision-making process.
Authors: Homayoun Zargar; Patrick N Espiritu; Adrian S Fairey; Laura S Mertens; Colin P Dinney; Maria C Mir; Laura-Maria Krabbe; Michael S Cookson; Niels-Erik Jacobsen; Nilay M Gandhi; Joshua Griffin; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Nikhil Vasdev; Evan Y Yu; David Youssef; Evanguelos Xylinas; Nicholas J Campain; Wassim Kassouf; Marc A Dall'Era; Jo-An Seah; Cesar E Ercole; Simon Horenblas; Srikala S Sridhar; John S McGrath; Jonathan Aning; Shahrokh F Shariat; Jonathan L Wright; Andrew C Thorpe; Todd M Morgan; Jeff M Holzbeierlein; Trinity J Bivalacqua; Scott North; Daniel A Barocas; Yair Lotan; Jorge A Garcia; Andrew J Stephenson; Jay B Shah; Bas W van Rhijn; Siamak Daneshmand; Philippe E Spiess; Peter C Black Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-09-23 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Maximilian Burger; James W F Catto; Guido Dalbagni; H Barton Grossman; Harry Herr; Pierre Karakiewicz; Wassim Kassouf; Lambertus A Kiemeney; Carlo La Vecchia; Shahrokh Shariat; Yair Lotan Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Shahrokh F Shariat; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Ganesh S Palapattu; Yair Lotan; Craig G Rogers; Gilad E Amiel; Amnon Vazina; Amit Gupta; Patrick J Bastian; Arthur I Sagalowsky; Mark P Schoenberg; Seth P Lerner Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Marko Babjuk; Maximilian Burger; Otakar Capoun; Daniel Cohen; Eva M Compérat; José L Dominguez Escrig; Paolo Gontero; Fredrik Liedberg; Alexandra Masson-Lecomte; A Hugh Mostafid; Joan Palou; Bas W G van Rhijn; Morgan Rouprêt; Shahrokh F Shariat; Thomas Seisen; Viktor Soukup; Richard J Sylvester Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2021-09-10 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Firas Abdollah; Giorgio Gandaglia; Rodolphe Thuret; Jan Schmitges; Zhe Tian; Claudio Jeldres; Niccolò Maria Passoni; Alberto Briganti; Shahrokh F Shariat; Paul Perrotte; Francesco Montorsi; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Maxine Sun Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: J Alfred Witjes; Harman Max Bruins; Richard Cathomas; Eva M Compérat; Nigel C Cowan; Georgios Gakis; Virginia Hernández; Estefania Linares Espinós; Anja Lorch; Yann Neuzillet; Mathieu Rouanne; George N Thalmann; Erik Veskimäe; Maria J Ribal; Antoine G van der Heijden Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: E Xylinas; M Kent; L Kluth; A Pycha; E Comploj; R S Svatek; Y Lotan; Q-D Trinh; P I Karakiewicz; S Holmang; D S Scherr; M Zerbib; A J Vickers; S F Shariat Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-08-27 Impact factor: 7.640