The Performance of Tumor Size as Risk Stratification Parameter in Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma (UTUC).

Endoscopic management Kidney-sparing surgery Radical nephroureterectomy Risk stratification model Tumor diameter

Journal

Clinical genitourinary cancer
ISSN: 1938-0682
Titre abrégé: Clin Genitourin Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101260955

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 2021
Historique:
received: 15 07 2020
revised: 01 09 2020
accepted: 07 09 2020
pubmed: 14 10 2020
medline: 19 8 2021
entrez: 13 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of different tumor diameters for identifying ≥ pT2 upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) at radical nephroureterectomy. This was a multi-institutional retrospective study that included 932 patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy for nonmetastatic UTUC between 2000 and 2016. Tumor sizes were pathologically assessed and categorized into 4 groups: ≤ 1 cm, 1.1 to 2 cm, 2.1 to 3 cm, and > 3 cm. We performed logistic regression and decision-curve analyses. Overall, 45 (4.8%) patients had a tumor size ≤ 1 cm, 141 (15.1%) between 1.1 and 2 cm, 247 (26.5%) between 2.1 and 3 cm, and 499 (53.5%) > 3 cm. In preoperative predictive models that were adjusted for the effects of standard clinicopathologic features, tumor diameters > 2 cm (odds ratio, 2.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.70-3.32; P < .001) and > 3 cm (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.38-2.38; P < .001) were independently associated with ≥ pT2 pathologic staging. The addition of the > 2-cm diameter cutoff improved the area under the curve of the model from 58.8% to 63.0%. Decision-curve analyses demonstrated a clinical net benefit of 0.09 and a net reduction of 8 per 100 patients. The 2-cm cutoff appears to be most useful in identifying patients at risk of harboring ≥ pT2 UTUC. This confirms the current European Association of Urology guideline's risk stratification. Tumor size alone is not sufficient for optimal risk stratification, rather a constellation of features is needed to select the best candidate for kidney-sparing surgery.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33046411
pii: S1558-7673(20)30218-4
doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2020.09.002
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

272.e1-272.e7

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Beat Foerster (B)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland.

Mohammad Abufaraj (M)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.

Andrea Mari (A)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Unit of Oncologic Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Thomas Seisen (T)

Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, GRC n°5, Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Urology, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France.

Marco Bandini (M)

Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Donald Schweitzer (D)

Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Anna K Czech (AK)

Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.

Marco Moschini (M)

Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Klinik für Urologie, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland.

David D'Andrea (D)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Marco Bianchi (M)

Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Kees Hendricksen (K)

Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Morgan Rouprêt (M)

Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, GRC n°5, Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Urology, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France.

Alberto Briganti (A)

Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Bas W G van Rhijn (BWG)

Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Piotr Chłosta (P)

Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.

Pierre Colin (P)

Department of Urology, Hôpital Privé de La Louvière, Générale de Santé, Lille, France.

Hubert John (H)

Department of Urology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland.

Shahrokh F Shariat (SF)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: sfshariat@gmail.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH