Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Benefits Survival in High-Grade Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis

Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Residual Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Growing evidence supports the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). However, the implications of residual UTUC at radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) after NAC are not well characterized. Our objective was to compare oncologic outcomes for pathologic risk-matched patients who underwent RNU for UTUC who either received NAC or were chemotherapy-naïve.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 1993 patients (including 112 NAC recipients) who underwent RNU for nonmetastatic, high-grade UTUC between 1985 and 2022 in a large, international, multicenter cohort. We divided the cohort into low-risk and high-risk groups defined according to pathologic findings of muscle invasion and lymph node involvement at RNU. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable analyses were performed to determine clinical and demographic factors associated with these outcomes.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Among patients with low-risk pathology at RNU, RFS, OS, and CSS were similar between the NAC and chemotherapy-naïve groups. Among patients with high-risk pathology at RNU, the NAC group had poorer RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 3.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.10-4.48), OS (HR 2.06, 95% CI 1.33-3.20), and CSS (subdistribution HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.37-4.69) in comparison to the pathologic risk-matched, chemotherapy-naïve group. Limitations include the lack of centralized pathologic review.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Patients with residual invasive disease at RNU after NAC represent a uniquely high-risk population with respect to oncologic outcomes. There is a critical need to determine an optimal adjuvant approach for these patients.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We studied a large, international group of patients with cancer of the upper urinary tract who underwent surgery either with or without receiving chemotherapy beforehand. We identified a high-risk subgroup of patients with residual aggressive cancer after chemotherapy and surgery who should be prioritized for clinical trials and drug development.

The role of perioperative chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy

PURPOSE

To summarize evidence regarding the use of neoadjuvant (NAC) and adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) among patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE and the Cochrane library was performed to identify any original or review article on the role of perioperative chemotherapy for UTUC patients treated with RNU.

RESULTS

With regards to NAC, retrospective studies consistently suggested that it may be associated with better pathological downstaging (pDS) ranging from 10.8 to 80% and complete response (pCR) ranging from 4.3 to 15%, while decreasing the risk of recurrence and death as compared to RNU alone. Even higher pDS ranging from 58 to 75% and pCR ranging from 14 to 38% were observed in single-arm phase II trials. With regards to AC, retrospective studies provided conflicting results although the largest report from the National Cancer Database suggested an overall survival benefit in pT3-T4 and/or pN + patients. In addition, a phase III randomized controlled trial showed that the use of AC was associated with a disease-free survival benefit (HR = 0.45; 95% CI = [0.30-0.68]; p = 0.0001) in pT2-T4 and/or pN + patients with acceptable toxicity profile. This benefit was consistent in all subgroups analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative chemotherapy improves oncological outcomes associated with RNU. Given the impact of RNU on renal function, the rational is stronger for the use of NAC which impacts final pathology and potentially prolongs survival. However, the level of evidence is stronger for the use of AC that has been proven to decrease the risk of recurrence after RNU with a potential survival benefit.

The prognostic impact of lymphovascular invasion for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: A propensity score-weighted analysis

Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) predicts poor survival in patients with pathologically localized or locally advanced upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UT-UC). However, LVI is associated with high tumor grade, tumor necrosis, advanced tumor stage, tumor location, concomitant carcinoma in situ, lymph node metastasis, and sessile tumor architecture. These factors might interfere with the analysis of the impact of LVI on oncological prognosis. To address this, this study aimed to clarify the relationship between LVI and patient prognosis in UT-UC using propensity score weighting. Data were collected from 789 patients with UT-UC treated with radical nephroureterectomy without chemotherapy. We evaluated the significance of LVI in predicting metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) using propensity score weighting. All weighted baseline characteristics included in the propensity score model were balanced between the LVI (+) and LVI (-) groups. The MFS, CSS, and OS were all significantly poorer in the LVI (+) group. For patients without LVI, the 5-year MFS, CSS, and OS rates were 65.3%, 73.1%, and 67.3%, respectively, whereas the corresponding rates were 50.2%, 63.8 %, and 54.6%, respectively, for patients with LVI. (all P < .001). For patients without LVI, the 10-year MFS, CSS, and OS rates were 61.5%, 69.6%, and 59.2%, respectively, whereas those for patients with LVI were 44.5%, 57.0%, and 42.7%, respectively (all P < .001). LVI is an important pathological feature that predicts metastasis development and worse survival outcome after radical surgery in UT-UC patients.

The prognostic impact of lymph node dissection for clinically node-negative upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma in patients who are treated with radical nephroureterectomy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the prognostic impact of lymph node dissection (LND) in patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) with bladder cuff excision (BCE) for clinically node-negative (cN0) upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC).

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 520 patients with cN0 UTUC in a single tertiary referral center from 2000 to 2015. The patients were divided into three groups: patients with and without pathologically proved lymph node metastasis (pN1-3 and pN0, respectively) and patients without LND (pNx). We analyzed associations between overall survival (OS)/ disease-free survival (DFS)/ cancer-specific survival (CSS) and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

The patients were divided into three groups (pN1-3, pN0 and pNx with 20, 303, and 197 patients, respectively). OS/DFS/CSS in the pN1-3 group were significantly worse (all p<0.001) compared with the pN0 group. However, there were no significant differences between the pNx and pN0 groups. In the multivariate analyses, CSS was only affected by age [(hazard ratio (HR) = 1.03, p = 0.008]), positive surgical margin (HR = 3.38, p<0.001) and pathological T3-4 stages (HR = 4.07, p<0.001). In the subgroup analyses for patients with LND, locally advanced disease (pT3 and pT4) had significantly more metastases [T3-4: 13.91% (16/115) vs. T0-2: 1.92% (4/208), p<0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

In the pN0 group, LND for cN0 UTUC did not show therapeutic benefits in terms of DFS, CSS, and OS. However, LND with RNU allowed optimal tumor staging, through patients still had a poor prognosis. Clinically occult LN metastases were found in 6.2% of our patients.

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in patients undergoing nephroureterectomy for urothelial cancer: a multidisciplinary systematic review and critical analysis

INTRODUCTION

The benefit of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) is not yet supported by randomized controlled trials in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), but the evidence is increasing. This narrative systematic review was conducted to evaluate the available evidence on the role of NAST in patients undergoing radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for UTUC.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched for all relevant articles or conference abstracts published and indexed in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus on July 19, 2021. The study was reported according to the PRISMA criteria and designed within the PICOS framework. We included studies comparing patients with non-metastatic UTUC who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or immunotherapy (NAI) with patients who underwent definitive surgery alone or surgery plus adjuvant systemic therapy. Prospective uncontrolled studies were also included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We identified 27 reports (NAC, N.=24 and NAI, N.=3) published between 2010 and 2021. Twenty of the 24 studies on NAC were retrospective comparative analyses, whereas the remaining four were prospective single-arm studies. One of the three NAI studies exclusively enrolled patients with UTUC. NAC was associated with improved survival and better pathological response relative to surgery alone, but there was no clear advantage when compared to surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall, the drug-induced toxicity and risk of disease progression were acceptable but the inherent bias across study designs, inadequate reporting and heterogeneous definition of primary outcomes render it difficult to synthesize results, compare centers, and inform practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The current level of evidence supporting NAST for UTUC is relatively low and the inability to predict responsiveness and thereby pinpoint the optimal candidates remains a major challenge. There is a need to compare NAST to adjuvant therapies using clearly defined primary endpoints as minimum reporting standards developed by a multidisciplinary team.

Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study

Objective

To compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma (RPUC) patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (NU) and inadvertent radical nephrectomy (RN).

Patients and methods

In this retrospective study, patients with RPUC who underwent NU or RN diagnosed between 2004 and 2017 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. To adjust the confounders, the propensity score-matched analysis was conducted. The Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test were performed to explore the effect of different surgical methods on OS and CSS.

Results

A total of 2197 cases were finally included in this analysis, among which, 187 (8.5%) patients were treated with RN and 2010 (91.5%) patients were treated with NU. Before matching, the survival analysis revealed that the OS (HR: 1.444, 95%CI: 1.197, 1.741) and CSS (HR: 1.522, 95%CI: 1.211, 1.914) of patients who received RN were worse than that of patients who received NU (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, respectively). After matching, the RN group had a worse OS (HR: 1.298, 95%CI: 1.002, 1.682) than the NU group (p = 0.048). No significant difference was observed in CSS between the RN and NU groups (p = 0.282). The hierarchical analysis showed that there was no significant difference observed in OS and CSS in patients with tumor size ≤4.2 cm (p = 0.884 and p = 0.496, respectively). In tumor size &gt;4.2 cm, both OS (HR: 1.545, 95%CI: 1.225, 1.948) and CSS (HR: 1.607, 95%CI: 1.233, 2.095) of patients who received RN were worse than those of patients who received NU (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.0005).

Conclusion

RN could lead to worse oncological outcomes than NU in patients with renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma. Accurate diagnosis of renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma is extremely important.

Trends in the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and oncological outcomes for high‐risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a multicentre retrospective study

Objective

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on locally advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a pooled analysis

Background

The outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been established in bladder cancer but remains controversial in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). In this work, we explored the therapeutic effect of NAC in patients with locally advanced UTUC.

Methods

We conducted a literature search on articles published from 1995 up to April 2020 in PubMed/Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar. A total of 19 eligible studies with 6,283 patients were identified, from which the overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), pathological complete response (pCR) rate and pathological partial response (pPR) rate were extracted. All analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.3 and Stata statistical software (version 15).

Results

In total, 6,283 UTUC patients were included from 19 eligible studies out of which 1,474 patients received NAC and subsequent radical nephroureterectomy (RNU), whereas 4,809 patients received RNU only. Compared with single RNU, patients with NAC and subsequent RNU exhibited longer OS, CSS, PFS, DFS by hazard ratio (HR) 2.14 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.75–2.63; P<0.001], HR 2.07 (95% CI: 1.49–2.87; P<0.001), HR 2.00 (95% CI: 1.42–2.83; P<0.001), and HR 3.76 (95% CI: 2.16–6.56; P<0.001). pCR rate and pPR rate of NAC are 0.10 (0.07–0.13) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.32–0.49, P <0.001) respectively.

Conclusions

This work revealed that NAC and subsequent RNU provided better survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced UTUC when compared with single RNU.

Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A 2020 Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, and Future Perspectives on Systemic Therapy

CONTEXT

To improve the prognosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), clinicians have used neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) before or after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Despite some new data, the evidence remains mixed on their efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

To update the current evidence on the role of NAC and AC for UTUC.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched for all studies investigating NAC or AC for UTUC in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings up to February 2020. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

For NAC, the pooled pathologic complete response rate (≤ypT0N0M0) was 11% (n = 811) and pathologic partial response rate (≤ypT1N0M0) was 43% (n = 869), both across 14 studies. Across six studies, the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-0.59, p <  0.001) for overall survival (OS) and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.24-0.61, p <  0.001) for cancer-specific survival (CSS) in favor of NAC. The evidence for NAC is at best level 2. As for AC, there was a benefit in OS (pooled HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64-0.92, p =  0.004 across 14 studies and 7983 patients), CSS (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69-0.91, p =  0.001 across 18 studies and 5659 patients), and disease-free survival (DFS; pooled HR 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38-0.70 across four studies and 602 patients). While most studies were retrospective (level 2 evidence), there were two prospective randomized trials providing level 1 evidence. There are currently four phase 2 trials on neoadjuvant immunotherapy and three phase 2 trials on adjuvant immunotherapy for UTUC.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC for UTUC confers a favorable pathologic response and tumor downstaging rate, and an OS and CSS benefit compared with RNU alone. AC confers an OS, CSS, and DFS benefit compared with RNU alone. Currently, the evidence for AC appears stronger (with positive level 1 evidence) than that for NAC (at best level 2 evidence). Limited data are available for chemoimmunotherapy approaches, but preliminary data support an active research investment.

PATIENT SUMMARY

After a comprehensive search of the latest studies examining the role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial cancer, the pooled evidence shows that perioperative chemotherapy was beneficial for prolonging survival; however, the evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy was stronger than that for neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on survival prognosis and pathological downstaging in patients presenting with high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

PURPOSE

Controversy remains with using neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the peer-reviewed literature to assess the role of NAC in high-risk UTUC patients.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were the main sources of relevant studies. The search terms included: "Upper urothelial carcinoma"; "UTUC"; "Urinary tract cancer"; and "Transitional cell carcinoma" combined with "Neoadjuvant chemotherapy" and "adjuvant chemotherapy". We studied the relationship of UTUC and NAC. Overall survival, recurrent-free survival, cancer-specific survival and pathological response rate in patients treated with/without NAC before radical surgery were evaluated.

RESULTS

Five trials were selected, and included 532 participants. Each of the included studies was retrospective. The combined analysis showed that when compared to controls, the pooled hazard ratios of overall survival, recurrence-free survival and cancer-specific survival were 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34-0.64; P < .00001); 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37-0.66; P < .00001); and 0.37 (95% CI, 0.25-0.54; P < .00001), respectively. It indicates the beneficial effects of NAC for the prognosis of survival in UTUC. Additionally, NAC was significantly associated with T-stage down-grading (T3/4 to ≤T2; OR=7.58 [4.66, 12.33]; P < .0001) and pathological lymph node status (N+ to N0; OR = 6.24 [2.57,15.15]; P < .00001).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC treatment before radical nephron-ureterectomy significantly improves survival prognosis in patients with high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma. However, considerable prospective and randomized studies are needed to confirm this perspective.