1
|
von Deimling M, Furrer M, Mertens LS, Mari A, van Ginkel N, Bacchiani M, Maas M, Pichler R, Li R, Moschini M, Bianchi A, Vetterlein MW, Lonati C, Crocetto F, Taylor J, Tully KH, Afferi L, Soria F, Del Giudice F, Longoni M, Laukhtina E, Antonelli A, Rink M, Fisch M, Lotan Y, Spiess PE, Black PC, Kiss B, Pradere B, Shariat SF. Impact of the extent of lymph node dissection on survival outcomes in clinically lymph node-positive bladder cancer. BJU Int 2024; 133:341-350. [PMID: 37904652 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16210] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the oncological impact of extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) vs standard PLND (sPLND) during radical cystectomy (RC) in clinically lymph node-positive (cN+) bladder cancer (BCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS In this retrospective, multicentre study we included 969 patients who underwent RC with sPLND (internal/external iliac and obturator lymph nodes) or ePLND (sPLND plus common iliac and presacral nodes) with or without platin-based peri-operative chemotherapy for cTany N1-3 M0 BCa between 1991 and 2022. We assessed the impact of ePLND on recurrence-free survival (RFS) and the distribution of recurrences (locoregional and distant recurrences). The secondary endpoint was overall survival (OS). We performed propensity-score matching using covariates associated with the extent of PLND in univariable logistic regression analysis. The association of the extent of PLND with RFS and OS was investigated using Cox regression models. RESULTS Of 969 cN+ patients, 510 were 1:1 matched on propensity scores. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) time to recurrence was 8 (4-16) months, and median (IQR) follow-up of alive patients was 30 (13-51) months. Disease recurrence was observed in 104 patients in the ePLND and 107 in the sPLND group. Of these, 136 (27%), 47 (9.2%) and 19 patients (3.7%) experienced distant, locoregional, or both distant and locoregional disease recurrence, respectively. When stratified by the extent of PLND, we did not find a difference in recurrence patterns (P > 0.05). ePLND improved neither RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.19; P = 0.5) nor OS (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60-1.01; P = 0.06) compared to sPLND. Stratification by induction chemotherapy did not change outcomes. CONCLUSION Performing an ePLND at the time of RC in cN+ patients improved neither RFS nor OS compared to sPLND, regardless of induction chemotherapy status. Pretreatment risk stratification is paramount to identify ideal candidates for RC with ePLND as part of a multimodal treatment approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Markus von Deimling
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Marc Furrer
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
- Department of Urology, Solothurner Spitäler AG, Olten, Solothurn, Switzerland
| | - Laura S Mertens
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Andrea Mari
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Noor van Ginkel
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mara Bacchiani
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Moritz Maas
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Department of Urology, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Renate Pichler
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center Innsbruck, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Roger Li
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Bianchi
- Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy
| | - Malte W Vetterlein
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Chiara Lonati
- Department of Urology, Spedali Civili of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Felice Crocetto
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples 'Federico II', Naples, Italy
| | - Jacob Taylor
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Karl H Tully
- Department of Urology and Neurourology, Marien Hospital Herne, Ruhr-University Bochum, Herne, Germany
| | - Luca Afferi
- Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - Francesco Soria
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Francesco Del Giudice
- Department of Maternal Infant and Urologic Sciences, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Mattia Longoni
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Alessandro Antonelli
- Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy
| | - Michael Rink
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Margit Fisch
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Yair Lotan
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Philippe E Spiess
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Peter C Black
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Bernhard Kiss
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Urosud, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint-Fonsegrives, France
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
- Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan
- Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Richters A, van Ginkel N, Meijer RP, Wondergem M, Schoots I, Vis AN, Kiemeney LALM, van Rhijn BWG, Witjes JA, Aben KKH, Mertens LS. Staging fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a nationwide population-based study. BJU Int 2023; 132:420-427. [PMID: 37246479 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To provide insight into the use and staging information on lymph-node involvement added by fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), based on a nationwide population-based cohort study. PATIENTS AND METHODS We analysed a nationwide cohort of patients with MIBC without signs of distant metastases, newly diagnosed in the Netherlands between November 2017 and October 2019. From this cohort, we selected patients who underwent pre-treatment staging with CT only or CT and FDG-PET/CT. The distribution of patients, disease characteristics, imaging findings, nodal status (clinical nodal stage cN0 vs cN+) and treatment were described for each imaging modality group (CT only vs CT and FDG-PET/CT). RESULTS We identified 2731 patients with MIBC: 1888 (69.1%) underwent CT only; 606 (22.2%) underwent CT and FDG-PET/CT, 237 (8.6%) underwent no CT. Of the patients who underwent CT only, 200/1888 (10.6%) were staged as cN+, vs 217/606 (35.8%) who underwent CT and FDG-PET/CT. Stratified analysis showed that this difference was found in patients with clinical tumour stage (cT)2 as well as cT3/4 MIBC. Of patients who underwent both imaging modalities and were staged with CT as cN0, 109/498 (21.9%) were upstaged to cN+ based on FDG-PET/CT. Radical cystectomy (RC) was the most common treatment within both imaging groups. Preoperative chemotherapy was more frequently applied in cN+ disease and in FDG-PET/CT-staged patients. Concordance of pathological N stage after upfront RC was higher among patients staged as cN+ with CT and FDG-PET/CT (50.0% pN+) than those staged as cN+ with only CT (39.3%). CONCLUSION Patients with MIBC who underwent pre-treatment staging with FDG-PET/CT were more often staged as lymph node positive, regardless of cT stage. In patients with MIBC who underwent CT and FDG-PET/CT, FDG-PET/CT led to clinical nodal upstaging in approximately one-fifth. Additional imaging findings may influence subsequent treatment strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anke Richters
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Noor van Ginkel
- Department of Urology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Richard P Meijer
- Department of Oncologic Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Maurits Wondergem
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ivo Schoots
- Department of Radiology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - André N Vis
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lambertus A L M Kiemeney
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Bas W G van Rhijn
- Department of Urology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - J Alfred Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Katja K H Aben
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Laura S Mertens
- Department of Urology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van Ginkel N, van Gennep EJ, Oosterbaan L, Greidanus J, Boellaard TN, Wondergem M, Vis AN, de Reijke TM, van Rhijn BWG, Mertens LS. Added Clinical Value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT to Stage Patients With High-Risk Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Before Radical Cystectomy. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2023; 21:342-348. [PMID: 36918302 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2023.02.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2023] [Revised: 02/01/2023] [Accepted: 02/01/2023] [Indexed: 02/24/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) is increasingly used in the preoperative staging of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The clinical added value of FDG-PET/CT in high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is unknown. In this study, the value of FDG-PET/CT in addition to contrast enhanced (CE)-CT was evaluated in high-risk NMIBC before radical cystectomy (RC). MATERIALS AND METHODS This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with high risk and very-high risk urothelial NMIBC scheduled for RC in a tertiary referral center between 2011 and 2020. Patients underwent staging with CE-CT (chest and abdomen/pelvis) and FDG-PET/CT. We assessed the clinical disease stage before and after FDG-PET/CT and the treatment recommendation based on the stage before and after FDG-PET/CT. The accuracy of CT and FDG-PET/CT for identifying metastatic disease was defined by the receiver-operating curve using a reference-standard including histopathology/cytology (if available), imaging and follow-up. RESULTS A total of 92 patients were identified (median age: 71 years). In 14/92 (15%) patients, FDG-PET/CT detected metastasis (12 suspicious lymph nodes and 4 distant metastases). The disease stage changed in 11/92 (12%) patients based on additional FDG-PET/CT findings. FDG-PET/CT led to a different treatment in 9/92 (10%) patients. According to the reference standard, 25/92 (27%) patients had metastases. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of FDG-PET/CT was 36%, 93% and 77% respectively, versus 12%, 97% and 74% of CE-CT only. The area under the ROC curve was 0.643 for FDG-PET/CT and 0.545 for CT, P = .036. CONCLUSION The addition of FDG-PET/CT to CE-CT imaging changed the treatment in 10% of patients and proved to be a valuable diagnostic tool in a selected subgroup of NMIBC patients scheduled for RC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noor van Ginkel
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Erik J van Gennep
- Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Urology, Leiden UMC, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Liselot Oosterbaan
- Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joyce Greidanus
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thierry N Boellaard
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maurits Wondergem
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - André N Vis
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M de Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bas W G van Rhijn
- Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Urology, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - Laura S Mertens
- Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|