BACKGROUND: The role of pre-operative radiation therapy in the treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer is unclear. The objective of this report is to present a meta-analysis of the published clinical trial data on this topic to determine whether pre-operative radiation improves survival in patients with this disease. METHODS: Data from 5 randomized trial were pooled using the meta-analytic techniques previously described by Peto et al. Three and five year survival were compared between patients receiving pre-operative radiation therapy followed by cystectomy versus patients treated with cystectomy alone. RESULTS: A summary odds ratio was calculated following a statistical analysis showing a lack of heterogeneity among the included studies in terms of their estimate of effect. The calculated Peto odds ratio was 0.71 favoring the use of preoperative radiation (95% CI 0.48-1.06). Due to possible biases in this original analysis due to study design deficiencies, a sensitivity analysis showed a "corrected" odds ratio of 0.94 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.57- 1.55, a non-statistically significant result. CONCLUSION: The available clinical trial data do not support a role for routine use of pre-operative radiation therapy in the treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer. Additional well designed trials are needed to address this issue.
BACKGROUND: The role of pre-operative radiation therapy in the treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer is unclear. The objective of this report is to present a meta-analysis of the published clinical trial data on this topic to determine whether pre-operative radiation improves survival in patients with this disease. METHODS: Data from 5 randomized trial were pooled using the meta-analytic techniques previously described by Peto et al. Three and five year survival were compared between patients receiving pre-operative radiation therapy followed by cystectomy versus patients treated with cystectomy alone. RESULTS: A summary odds ratio was calculated following a statistical analysis showing a lack of heterogeneity among the included studies in terms of their estimate of effect. The calculated Peto odds ratio was 0.71 favoring the use of preoperative radiation (95% CI 0.48-1.06). Due to possible biases in this original analysis due to study design deficiencies, a sensitivity analysis showed a "corrected" odds ratio of 0.94 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.57- 1.55, a non-statistically significant result. CONCLUSION: The available clinical trial data do not support a role for routine use of pre-operative radiation therapy in the treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer. Additional well designed trials are needed to address this issue.
Authors: Kristen Mcalpine; Dean A Fergusson; Rodney H Breau; Luke F Reynolds; Risa Shorr; Scott C Morgan; Libni Eapen; Ilias Cagiannos; Chris Morash; Luke T Lavallée Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-05-28 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Paul Sargos; Brian C Baumann; Libni J Eapen; Amit Bahl; Vedang Murthy; Guilhem Roubaud; Mathieu Orré; Jason A Efstathiou; Shahrokh Shariat; Stephane Larré; Pierre Richaud; John P Christodouleas Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2016-10
Authors: Valérie Fonteyne; Piet Dirix; Sara Junius; Elke Rammant; Piet Ost; Gert De Meerleer; Martijn Swimberghe; Karel Decaestecker Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-05-02 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Mona Kamal; Neema Navai; Kelly K Bree; Loretta A Williams; Charles S Cleeland; Shu-En Shen; Xin Shelley Wang Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-08-12 Impact factor: 6.575