1
|
Powles T, Bellmunt J, Comperat E, De Santis M, Huddart R, Loriot Y, Necchi A, Valderrama BP, Ravaud A, Shariat SF, Szabados B, van der Heijden MS, Gillessen S. ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline interim update on first-line therapy in advanced urothelial carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2024:S0923-7534(24)00075-9. [PMID: 38490358 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2024] [Revised: 02/29/2024] [Accepted: 03/01/2024] [Indexed: 03/17/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- T Powles
- Barts Cancer Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - J Bellmunt
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Cancer Centre, Boston, USA
| | - E Comperat
- Department of Pathology, Medical University Vienna, Austria
| | - M De Santis
- Department of Urology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany; Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - R Huddart
- Royal Marsden Hospital, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Y Loriot
- Department of Medical Oncology, Université Paris-Saclay and Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - A Necchi
- Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan; Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - B P Valderrama
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Virgen del Rocio, Seville, Spain
| | - A Ravaud
- Department of Medical Oncology, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, USA; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - B Szabados
- Barts Cancer Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - M S van der Heijden
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (EOC-IOSI), Bellinzona; Università della Svizzera Italina (USI), Lugano, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
von Deimling M, Rajwa P, Tilki D, Heidenreich A, Pallauf M, Bianchi A, Yanagisawa T, Kawada T, Karakiewicz PI, Gontero P, Pradere B, Ploussard G, Rink M, Shariat SF. The current role of precision surgery in oligometastatic prostate cancer. ESMO Open 2022; 7:100597. [PMID: 36208497 PMCID: PMC9551071 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100597] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2022] [Revised: 08/31/2022] [Accepted: 09/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Oligometastatic prostate cancer (omPCa) is a novel intermediate disease state characterized by a limited volume of metastatic cells and specific locations. Accurate staging is paramount to unmask oligometastatic disease, as provided by prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography. Driven by the results of prospective trials employing conventional and/or modern staging modalities, the treatment landscape of omPCa has rapidly evolved over the last years. Several treatment-related questions comprising the concept of precision strikes are under development. For example, beyond systemic therapy, cohort studies have found that cytoreductive radical prostatectomy (CRP) can confer a survival benefit in select patients with omPCa. More importantly, CRP has been consistently shown to improve long-term local symptoms when the tumor progresses across disease states due to resistance to systemic therapies. Metastasis-directed treatments have also emerged as a promising treatment option due to the visibility of oligometastatic disease and new technologies as well as treatment strategies to target the novel PCa colonies. Whether metastases are present at primary cancer diagnosis or detected upon biochemical recurrence after treatment with curative intent, targeted yet decisive elimination of disseminated tumor cell hotspots is thought to improve survival outcomes. One such strategy is salvage lymph node dissection in oligorecurrent PCa which can alter the natural history of progressive PCa. In this review, we will highlight how refinements in modern staging modalities change the classification and treatment of (oligo-)metastatic PCa. Further, we will also discuss the current role and future directions of precision surgery in omPCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M von Deimling
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - P Rajwa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland
| | - D Tilki
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - A Heidenreich
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - M Pallauf
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Hospital Salzburg, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
| | - A Bianchi
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy
| | - T Yanagisawa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - T Kawada
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - P I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - P Gontero
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - B Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint-Fonsegrives, France
| | - G Ploussard
- Department of Urology, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint-Fonsegrives, France
| | - M Rink
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; 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, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, USA; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Powles T, Bellmunt J, Comperat E, De Santis M, Huddart R, Loriot Y, Necchi A, Valderrama BP, Ravaud A, Shariat SF, Szabados B, van der Heijden MS, Gillessen S. Bladder cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2022; 33:244-258. [PMID: 34861372 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.11.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 179] [Impact Index Per Article: 89.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2021] [Revised: 11/16/2021] [Accepted: 11/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- T Powles
- Barts Cancer Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - J Bellmunt
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre-IMIM Lab, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - E Comperat
- L'Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France
| | - M De Santis
- Department of Urology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
| | - R Huddart
- Royal Marsden Hospital, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Y Loriot
- Département de Médecine Oncologique, Université Paris-Saclay and Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - A Necchi
- Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | | | - A Ravaud
- Hôpital Saint-André CHU, Bordeaux, France; Department of Medical Oncology, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - B Szabados
- Barts Cancer Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospital, London, UK
| | - M S van der Heijden
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), EOC, Lugano, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mir MC, Marchioni M, Zargar H, Zargar-Shoshtari K, Fairey AS, Mertens LS, Dinney CP, Krabbe LM, Cookson MS, Jacobsen NE, Griffin J, Montgomery JS, Vasdev N, Yu EY, Xylinas E, McGrath JS, Kassouf W, Dall'Era MA, Sridhar SS, Aning J, Shariat SF, Wright JL, Thorpe AC, Morgan TM, Holzbeierlein JM, Bivalacqua TJ, North S, Barocas DA, Lotan Y, Grivas P, Stephenson AJ, Shah JB, van Rhijn BW, Spiess PE, Daneshmand S, Black PC. Corrigendum to "Nomogram Predicting Bladder Cancer-specific Mortality After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of an International Consortium" [Eur Urol Focus 2021;7:1347-54]. Eur Urol Focus 2022; 8:1559. [PMID: 35181282 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.01.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Carmen Mir
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Fundacion Instituto Valenciano Oncologia, Valencia, Spain.
| | - Michele Marchioni
- Departmentof Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Urology Unit, University "G. d'Annunzio", Chieti-Pescara, Italy
| | - Homi Zargar
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - K Zargar-Shoshtari
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - A S Fairey
- University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Laura S Mertens
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C P Dinney
- Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - L M Krabbe
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Urology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - M S Cookson
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - N E Jacobsen
- University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - J Griffin
- Department of Urology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
| | - J S Montgomery
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - N Vasdev
- Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - E Y Yu
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - J S McGrath
- Department of Surgery, Exeter Surgical Health Services Research Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - W Kassouf
- Department of Surgery (Division of Urology), McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - M A Dall'Era
- Department of Urology, University of California at Davis, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - S S Sridhar
- Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - J Aning
- Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK; Department of Surgery, Exeter Surgical Health Services Research Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria; UT Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA; Charles University, Prag, Czech Republic; University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - J L Wright
- Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - A C Thorpe
- Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - T M Morgan
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - J M Holzbeierlein
- Department of Urology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
| | - T J Bivalacqua
- Department of Urology, The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - S North
- Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada; Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - D A Barocas
- Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Y Lotan
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - P Grivas
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - A J Stephenson
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Urology, RUSH University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - J B Shah
- Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - B W van Rhijn
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P E Spiess
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - S Daneshmand
- USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - P C Black
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zhao H, Chan VWS, Castellani D, Chan EOT, Ong WLK, Peng Q, Moschini M, Krajewski W, Pradere B, Ng CF, Enikeev D, Vasdev N, Ekin G, Sousa A, Leon J, Guerrero-Ramos F, Tan WS, Kelly J, Shariat SF, Witjes JA, Teoh JYC. 1459 Intravesical Chemohyperthermia Versus Bacillus Calmette-Guerin Instillation for Intermediate- And High-Risk Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Br J Surg 2021. [DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab259.955] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
Traditional intravesical chemotherapy instillations under room temperature post trans-urethral resection (TUR) of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) have lower efficacies than maintenance BCG installations. Intravesical chemo-hyperthermia (CHT) at higher temperatures is developed to improve the efficacy of chemotherapy instillation. This systematic review aims to compare the use of CHT and BCG instillation post-TUR.
Method
The protocol of this review is registered on PROSPERO(CRD42020223277). A comprehensive literature search was performed on Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL to identify studies comparing CHT and BCG post-TUR for intermediate- or high-risk NMIBC. Primary outcomes include recurrence-free survival (RFS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes include adverse events (AE).
Results
From 2,375 identified records, four randomised control trials incorporating 327 patients were included for meta-analysis. The use of CHT was found to be non-inferior to BCG in RFS, PFS and AEs (Grades 1-3) (p > 0.05). Sensitivity analysis, excluding patients with BCG failures, show 24-36 months recurrence rate to be significantly lower in CHT group (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.98, p = 0.04) compared to the BCG group. In patients without carcinoma in situ (CIS), RFS is also significantly better in CHT patients (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32- 0.85, p < 0.01). Safety profile remains non-inferior to the BCG group in sensitivity analyses. Quality of evidence across all outcomes ranged from moderate to low.
Conclusions
In well-selected patients, intravesical CHT has superior oncological outcomes and non-inferior safety profile when compared to BCG maintenance therapy for patients with intermediate- and high-risk NMIBC. CHT is a possible alternative treatment during BCG shortage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Zhao
- The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - V W S Chan
- University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | | | - E O T Chan
- The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - W L K Ong
- Penang General Hospital, Penang, Malaysia
| | - Q Peng
- The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - M Moschini
- Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | | | - B Pradere
- University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France
| | - C F Ng
- The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - D Enikeev
- Sechenov University, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - N Vasdev
- University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom
| | - G Ekin
- Urla State Hospital, İzmir, Turkey
| | - A Sousa
- Comarcal Hospital, Monforte, Spain
| | - J Leon
- Comarcal Hospital, Monforte, Spain
| | | | - W S Tan
- University College London, London, United Kingdom
- Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - J Kelly
- University College London, London, United Kingdom
- Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - S F Shariat
- Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA
- University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, USA
- Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - J A Witjes
- Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijimegen, Netherlands
| | - J Y C Teoh
- The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Resch I, Bruchbacher A, Franke J, Fajkovic H, Remzi M, Shariat SF, Schmidinger M. Outcome of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma across different treatment lines. ESMO Open 2021; 6:100122. [PMID: 34217917 PMCID: PMC8261552 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100122] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Revised: 03/14/2021] [Accepted: 04/01/2021] [Indexed: 10/26/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have led to a paradigm change in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Prospective trials have focused on ICI treatment in the first or second line. The aim of this analysis is to evaluate the benefit of ICI across different treatment lines. PATIENTS AND METHODS This is a single-center retrospective study that included mRCC patients who received ICIs in various treatment lines. Objective response rates (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. RESULTS Ninety-four patients were eligible for full evaluation. Patients were classified as International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk group categorization as good, intermediate and poor risk in 26.8%, 61.6% and 14.8% of cases, respectively. They were treated with ICI monotherapy, dual ICI therapy and ICI + tyrosine kinase inhibitor in 59%, 20% and 21% of cases, respectively. ORR, median PFS and OS for the entire cohort was 39.4%, 9.67 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.9-12.4 months] and 23.6 months (95% CI 13.3-33.9 months), respectively. The ORR by treatment line was 33% in first, 40.4% in the second, 35% in the third and 43.5% in the fourth line and beyond. Median PFS by treatment line was 8.6, 10.3, 7.9 and 7.23 months, respectively. The median OS was not reached in first-line treatment and was 26.2, 18.1 and 20.7 months in the second, third and fourth line and beyond, respectively. CONCLUSIONS ICIs or ICI combinations are active in all treatment lines and should also be offered in heavily pretreated patients. Patient selection based on tumor and patient factors allows for maximal benefit from ICI-based therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I Resch
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | - A Bruchbacher
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - J Franke
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - H Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Remzi
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, USA; 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; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - M Schmidinger
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pisano F, Gontero P, Sylvester R, Joniau S, Serretta V, Larré S, Di Stasi S, van Rhijn B, Witjes A, Grotenhuis A, Colombo R, Briganti A, Babjuk M, Soukup V, Malmstrom PU, Irani J, Malats N, Baniel J, Mano R, Cai T, Cha E, Ardelt P, Varkarakis J, Bartoletti R, Dalbagni G, Shariat SF, Xylinas E, Karnes RJ, Palou J. Risk factors for residual disease at re-TUR in a large cohort of T1G3 patients. Actas Urol Esp 2021; 45:473-478. [PMID: 34147426 DOI: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2020.08.014] [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: 06/30/2020] [Accepted: 08/22/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The goals of transurethral resection of a bladder tumor (TUR) are to completely resect the lesions and to make a correct diagnosis in order to adequately stage the patient. It is well known that the presence of detrusor muscle in the specimen is a prerequisite to minimize the risk of under staging. Persistent disease after resection of bladder tumors is not uncommon and is the reason why the European Guidelines recommended a re-TUR for all T1 tumors. It was recently published that when there is muscle in the specimen, re-TUR does not influence progression or cancer specific survival. We present here the patient and tumor factors that may influence the presence of residual disease at re-TUR. MATERIAL AND METHODS In our retrospective cohort of 2451 primary T1G3 patients initially treated with BCG, pathology results for 934 patients (38.1%) who underwent re-TUR are available. 74% had multifocal tumors, 20% of tumors were more than 3 cm in diameter and 26% had concomitant CIS. In this subgroup of patients who underwent re-TUR, there was no residual disease in 267 patients (29%) and residual disease in 667 patients (71%): Ta in 378 (40%) and T1 in 289 (31%) patients. Age, gender, tumor status (primary/recurrent), previous intravesical therapy, tumor size, tumor multi-focality, presence of concomitant CIS, and muscle in the specimen were analyzed in order to evaluate risk factors of residual disease at re-TUR, both in univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regressions. RESULTS The following were not risk factors for residual disease: age, gender, tumor status and previous intravesical chemotherapy. The following were univariate risk factors for presence of residual disease: no muscle in TUR, multiple tumors, tumors > 3 cm, and presence of concomitant CIS. Due to the correlation between tumor multi-focality and tumor size, the multivariate model retained either the number of tumors or the tumor diameter (but not both), p < 0.001. The presence of muscle in the specimen was no longer significant, while the presence of CIS only remained significant in the model with tumor size, p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS The most significant factors for a higher risk of residual disease at re-TUR in T1G3 patients are multifocal tumors and tumors more than 3 cm. Patients with concomitant CIS and those without muscle in the specimen also have a higher risk of residual disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Pisano
- Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, University of Studies of Turin; Department of Urology, Fundacio Puigvert, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - P Gontero
- Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, University of Studies of Turin
| | - R Sylvester
- Formerly Department of Biostatistics, EORTC Headquarters
| | - S Joniau
- Oncologic and Reconstructive Urology, Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - V Serretta
- Department of Surgical, Oncological and Stomatological Sciences, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - S Larré
- Department of Surgical Science, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - S Di Stasi
- Policlinico Tor Vergata-University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - B van Rhijn
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A Grotenhuis
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - R Colombo
- Dipartimento di Urologia, Università Vita-Salute, Ospedale S. Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - A Briganti
- Dipartimento di Urologia, Università Vita-Salute, Ospedale S. Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - M Babjuk
- Department of Urology, Motol Hospital, University of Praha, Praha, Czech Republic
| | - V Soukup
- Department of Urology, Motol Hospital, University of Praha, Praha, Czech Republic
| | - P U Malmstrom
- Department of Urology, Academic Hospital, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - J Irani
- Department of Urology, Hospital Bicetre, France
| | - N Malats
- Genetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO)
| | - J Baniel
- Department of Urology, Rabin Medical Centre, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - R Mano
- Department of Urology, Rabin Medical Centre, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - T Cai
- Department of Urology, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy
| | - E Cha
- Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - P Ardelt
- University Hospital Basel, Urological University Clinic Basel-Liestal, Basel, Switzerland
| | - J Varkarakis
- Department of Urology, Sismanoglio Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - R Bartoletti
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - G Dalbagni
- Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, 1190, Austria; Department of Urology, Cochin Hospital, Paris, France
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - R J Karnes
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - J Palou
- Department of Urology, Fundacio Puigvert, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Papp L, Spielvogel CP, Grubmüller B, Grahovac M, Krajnc D, Ecsedi B, Sareshgi RAM, Mohamad D, Hamboeck M, Rausch I, Mitterhauser M, Wadsak W, Haug AR, Kenner L, Mazal P, Susani M, Hartenbach S, Baltzer P, Helbich TH, Kramer G, Shariat SF, Beyer T, Hartenbach M, Hacker M. Supervised machine learning enables non-invasive lesion characterization in primary prostate cancer with [ 68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48:1795-1805. [PMID: 33341915 PMCID: PMC8113201 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-05140-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2020] [Accepted: 11/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Risk classification of primary prostate cancer in clinical routine is mainly based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, Gleason scores from biopsy samples, and tumor-nodes-metastasis (TNM) staging. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) in vivo models for predicting low-vs-high lesion risk (LH) as well as biochemical recurrence (BCR) and overall patient risk (OPR) with machine learning. METHODS Fifty-two patients who underwent multi-parametric dual-tracer [18F]FMC and [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI as well as radical prostatectomy between 2014 and 2015 were included as part of a single-center pilot to a randomized prospective trial (NCT02659527). Radiomics in combination with ensemble machine learning was applied including the [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET, the apparent diffusion coefficient, and the transverse relaxation time-weighted MRI scans of each patient to establish a low-vs-high risk lesion prediction model (MLH). Furthermore, MBCR and MOPR predictive model schemes were built by combining MLH, PSA, and clinical stage values of patients. Performance evaluation of the established models was performed with 1000-fold Monte Carlo (MC) cross-validation. Results were additionally compared to conventional [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 standardized uptake value (SUV) analyses. RESULTS The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of the MLH model (0.86) was higher than the AUC of the [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 SUVmax analysis (0.80). MC cross-validation revealed 89% and 91% accuracies with 0.90 and 0.94 AUCs for the MBCR and MOPR models respectively, while standard routine analysis based on PSA, biopsy Gleason score, and TNM staging resulted in 69% and 70% accuracies to predict BCR and OPR respectively. CONCLUSION Our results demonstrate the potential to enhance risk classification in primary prostate cancer patients built on PET/MRI radiomics and machine learning without biopsy sampling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Papp
- QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - C P Spielvogel
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
- Christian Doppler Laboratory for Applied Metabolomics, Vienna, Austria
| | - B Grubmüller
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Grahovac
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - D Krajnc
- QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - B Ecsedi
- QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - R A M Sareshgi
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - D Mohamad
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Hamboeck
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - I Rausch
- QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Mitterhauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
- Ludwig Boltzmann Institute Applied Diagnostics, Vienna, Austria
| | - W Wadsak
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - A R Haug
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
- Christian Doppler Laboratory for Applied Metabolomics, Vienna, Austria
| | - L Kenner
- Christian Doppler Laboratory for Applied Metabolomics, Vienna, Austria
- Clinical Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - P Mazal
- Clinical Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Susani
- Clinical Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - P Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Common General and Pediatric Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - T H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Common General and Pediatric Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - G Kramer
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - T Beyer
- QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Hartenbach
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Hacker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Schmidinger M, Shariat SF, Fajkovic H. Dual immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Editorial re.: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced RCC: extended 4-year follow-up of the phase III CheckMate 214 trial. ESMO Open 2021; 6:100035. [PMID: 33421736 PMCID: PMC7808104 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2020.100035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2020] [Accepted: 12/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- M Schmidinger
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, USA; 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; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - H Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Szarvas T, Csizmarik A, Váradi M, Fazekas T, Hüttl A, Nyirády P, Hadaschik B, Grünwald V, Tschirdewahn S, Shariat SF, Sevcenco S, Maj-Hes A, Kramer G. The prognostic value of serum MMP-7 levels in prostate cancer patients who received docetaxel, abiraterone, or enzalutamide therapy. Urol Oncol 2020; 39:296.e11-296.e19. [PMID: 33046366 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [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: 07/22/2020] [Revised: 09/06/2020] [Accepted: 09/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The rapidly changing treatment landscape in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) calls for biomarkers to guide treatment decisions. We recently identified MMP-7 as a potential serum marker for the prediction of response and survival in mCRPC patients who received docetaxel (DOC) chemotherapy. Here, we aimed to test this finding in an independent patient cohort and in addition to explore the prognostic potential of serum MMP-7 in abiraterone (ABI) or enzalutamide (ENZA) treated patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS MMP-7 levels were measured in 836 serum samples from 320 mCRPC patients collected before and during DOC (n = 95), ABI (n = 140), or ENZA (n = 85) treatment by using the ELISA method. Results were correlated with clinical and follow-up data. RESULTS MMP-7 baseline levels were similar between the 3 treatment groups. In the ABI and ENZA cohorts, baseline MMP-7 levels were lower in patients with prior radical prostatectomy (P = 0.058 and P = 0.041, respectively). Baseline MMP-7 levels above the median were associated with shorter overall survival for the DOC (P = 0.001) and ENZA (P = 0.006) cohorts. Multivariable analyses in the DOC and ENZA cohorts revealed that high pretreatment MMP-7 level is an independent risk factor for patients' survival. In addition, in DOC-treated patients with high baseline MMP-7 level, marker decrease at the third DOC cycle was associated with improved survival. Patients with high baseline MMP-7 levels had better survival when treated with ABI compared to DOC or ENZA. CONCLUSIONS We confirmed the prognostic value of pretreatment MMP-7 serum level and its changes as independent predictors of survival in DOC-treated mCRPC patients. In addition, high MMP-7 was a negative predictor in ENZA-treated but not in ABI-treated patients. These results warrant further research to confirm the predictive value of serum MMP-7 and to explore the potential mechanistic involvement of MMP-7 in DOC and ENZA resistance of mCRPC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T Szarvas
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary; Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
| | - A Csizmarik
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - M Váradi
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - T Fazekas
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - A Hüttl
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - P Nyirády
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - B Hadaschik
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - V Grünwald
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - S Tschirdewahn
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prag, Czech Republic; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - S Sevcenco
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - A Maj-Hes
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - G Kramer
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Mir MC, Marchioni M, Zargar H, Zargar-Shoshtari K, Fairey AS, Mertens LS, Dinney CP, Krabbe LM, Cookson MS, Jacobsen NE, Griffin J, Montgomery JS, Vasdev N, Yu EY, Xylinas E, McGrath JS, Kassouf W, Dall'Era MA, Sridhar SS, Aning J, Shariat SF, Wright JL, Thorpe AC, Morgan TM, Holzbeierlein JM, Bivalacqua TJ, North S, Barocas DA, Lotan Y, Grivas P, Stephenson AJ, Shah JB, van Rhijn BW, Spiess PE, Daneshmand D, Black PC. Nomogram Predicting Bladder Cancer-specific Mortality After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of an International Consortium. Eur Urol Focus 2020; 7:1347-1354. [PMID: 32771446 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [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: 05/16/2020] [Revised: 06/25/2020] [Accepted: 07/16/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is associated with improved overall and cancer-specific survival. The post-NAC pathological stage has previously been reported to be a major determinant of outcome. OBJECTIVE To develop a postoperative nomogram for survival based on pathological and clinical parameters from an international consortium. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Between 2000 and 2015, 1866 patients with MIBC were treated at 19 institutions in the USA, Canada, and Europe. Analysis was limited to 640 patients with adequate follow-up who had received three or more cycles of NAC. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS A nomogram for bladder cancer-specific mortality (BCSM) was developed by multivariable Cox regression analysis. Decision curve analysis was used to assess the model's clinical utility. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 640 patients were identified. Downstaging to non-MIBC (ypT1, ypTa, and ypTis) occurred in 271 patients (42 %), and 113 (17 %) achieved a complete response (ypT0N0). The 5-yr BCSM was 47.2 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 41.2-52.6 %). On multivariable analysis, covariates with a statistically significant association with BCSM were lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.90 [95% CI: 1.4-2.6]; p < 0.001), positive surgical margins (HR 2.01 [95 % CI: 1.3-2.9]; p < 0.001), and pathological stage (with ypT0/Tis/Ta/T1 as reference: ypT2 [HR 2.77 {95 % CI: 1.7-4.6}; p < 0.001] and ypT3-4 [HR 5.9 {95 % CI: 3.8-9.3}; p < 0.001]). The area under the curve of the model predicting 5-yr BCSM after cross validation with 300 bootstraps was 75.4 % (95 % CI: 68.1-82.6 %). Decision curve analyses showed a modest net benefit for the use of the BCSM nomogram in the current cohort compared with the use of American Joint Committee on Cancer staging alone. Limitations include the retrospective study design and the lack of central pathology. CONCLUSIONS We have developed and internally validated a nomogram predicting BCSM after NAC and radical cystectomy for MIBC. The nomogram will be useful for patient counseling and in the identification of patients at high risk for BCSM suitable for enrollment in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy. PATIENT SUMMARY In this report, we looked at the outcomes of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer in a large multi-institutional population. We found that we can accurately predict death after radical surgical treatment in patients treated with chemotherapy before surgery. We conclude that the pathological report provides key factors for determining survival probability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Carmen Mir
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Fundacion Instituto Valenciano Oncologia, Valencia, Spain.
| | - Michele Marchioni
- Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Urology Unit, University "G. d'Annunzio", Chieti-Pescara, Italy
| | - Homi Zargar
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - K Zargar-Shoshtari
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - A S Fairey
- University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Laura S Mertens
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C P Dinney
- Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - L M Krabbe
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Urology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - M S Cookson
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - N E Jacobsen
- University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - J Griffin
- Department of Urology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
| | - J S Montgomery
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - N Vasdev
- Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - E Y Yu
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - J S McGrath
- Department of Surgery, Exeter Surgical Health Services Research Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - W Kassouf
- Department of Surgery (Division of Urology), McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - M A Dall'Era
- Department of Urology, University of California at Davis, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - S S Sridhar
- Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - J Aning
- Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK; Department of Surgery, Exeter Surgical Health Services Research Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria; UT Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA; Charles University, Prag, Czech Republic; University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - J L Wright
- Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - A C Thorpe
- Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - T M Morgan
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - J M Holzbeierlein
- Department of Urology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
| | - T J Bivalacqua
- Department of Urology, The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - S North
- Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada; Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - D A Barocas
- Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Y Lotan
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - P Grivas
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - A J Stephenson
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Urology, RUSH University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - J B Shah
- Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - B W van Rhijn
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P E Spiess
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - D Daneshmand
- USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - P C Black
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Polanec SH, Bickel H, Wengert GJ, Arnoldner M, Clauser P, Susani M, Shariat SF, Pinker K, Helbich TH, Baltzer PAT. Can the addition of clinical information improve the accuracy of PI-RADS version 2 for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in positive MRI? Clin Radiol 2019; 75:157.e1-157.e7. [PMID: 31690449 DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2019.09.139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2019] [Accepted: 09/27/2019] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
AIM To report prostate cancer (PCa) prevalence in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) categories and investigate the potential to avoid unnecessary, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsies by adding clinical and biochemical patient characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS The present institutional review board-approved, prospective study on 137 consecutive men with 178 suspicious lesions on 3 T MRI was performed. Routine data collected for each patient included patient characteristics (age, prostate volume), clinical background information (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels, PSA density), and PI-RADS v2 scores assigned in a double-reading approach. RESULTS Histopathological evaluation revealed a total of 93/178 PCa (52.2%). The mean age was 66.3 years and PSA density was 0.24 ng/ml2 (range, 0.04-0.89 ng/ml). Clinically significant PCa (csPCa, Gleason score >6) was confirmed in 50/93 (53.8%) lesions and was significantly associated with higher PI-RADS v2 scores (p=0.0044). On logistic regression analyses, age, PSA density, and PI-RADS v2 scores contributed independently to the diagnosis of csPCa (p=7.9×10-7, p=0.097, and p=0.024, respectively). The resulting area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to predict csPCa was 0.76 for PI-RADS v2, 0.59 for age, and 0.67 for PSA density. The combined regression model yielded an AUC of 0.84 for the diagnosis of csPCa and was significantly superior to each single parameter (p≤0.0009, respectively). Unnecessary biopsies could have been avoided in 50% (64/128) while only 4% (2/50) of csPCa lesions would have been missed. CONCLUSIONS Adding age and PSA density to PI-RADS v2 scores improves the diagnostic accuracy for csPCa. A combination of these variables with PI-RADS v2 can help to avoid unnecessary in-bore biopsies while still detecting the majority of csPCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S H Polanec
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - H Bickel
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - G J Wengert
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - M Arnoldner
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - P Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - M Susani
- Clinical Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prag, Czech Republic; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - K Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - T H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - P A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Austria; Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Horwich A, Babjuk M, Bellmunt J, Bruins HM, De Reijke TM, De Santis M, Gillessen S, James N, Maclennan S, Palou J, Powles T, Ribal MJ, Shariat SF, Van Der Kwast T, Xylinas E, Agarwal N, Arends T, Bamias A, Birtle A, Black PC, Bochner BH, Bolla M, Boormans JL, Bossi A, Briganti A, Brummelhuis I, Burger M, Castellano D, Cathomas R, Chiti A, Choudhury A, Compérat E, Crabb S, Culine S, De Bari B, DeBlok W, De Visschere PJL, Decaestecker K, Dimitropoulos K, Dominguez-Escrig JL, Fanti S, Fonteyne V, Frydenberg M, Futterer JJ, Gakis G, Geavlete B, Gontero P, Grubmüller B, Hafeez S, Hansel DE, Hartmann A, Hayne D, Henry AM, Hernandez V, Herr H, Herrmann K, Hoskin P, Huguet J, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Jones R, Kamat AM, Khoo V, Kiltie AE, Krege S, Ladoire S, Lara PC, Leliveld A, Linares-Espinós E, Løgager V, Lorch A, Loriot Y, Meijer R, Carmen Mir M, Moschini M, Mostafid H, Müller AC, Müller CR, N'Dow J, Necchi A, Neuzillet Y, Oddens JR, Oldenburg J, Osanto S, Oyen WJG, Pacheco-Figueiredo L, Pappot H, Patel MI, Pieters BR, Plass K, Remzi M, Retz M, Richenberg J, Rink M, Roghmann F, Rosenberg JE, Rouprêt M, Rouvière O, Salembier C, Salminen A, Sargos P, Sengupta S, Sherif A, Smeenk RJ, Smits A, Stenzl A, Thalmann GN, Tombal B, Turkbey B, Vahr Lauridsen S, Valdagni R, Van Der Heijden AG, Van Poppel H, Vartolomei MD, Veskimäe E, Vilaseca A, Vives Rivera FA, Wiegel T, Wiklund P, Williams A, Zigeuner R, Witjes JA. EAU-ESMO consensus statements on the management of advanced and variant bladder cancer-an international collaborative multi-stakeholder effort: under the auspices of the EAU and ESMO Guidelines Committees†. Ann Oncol 2019; 30:1697-1727. [PMID: 31740927 PMCID: PMC7360152 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdz296] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.6] [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: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Horwich
- Emeritus Professor, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Emeritus Professor, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| | - M Babjuk
- Depatment of Urology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - J Bellmunt
- IMIM-Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain; Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - H M Bruins
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| | - T M De Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M De Santis
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Charité University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - S Gillessen
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Oncology and Haematology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - N James
- University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham; Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham
| | - S Maclennan
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - J Palou
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - T Powles
- The Royal Free NHS Trust, London; Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - M J Ribal
- Uro-Oncology Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - S F Shariat
- Depatment of Urology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - T Van Der Kwast
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris; Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - N Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah (NCI-CCC), Salt Lake City, USA
| | - T Arends
- Urology Department, Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A Bamias
- 2nd Propaedeutic Dept of Internal Medicine, Medical School, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - A Birtle
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; Rosemere Cancer Centre, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals, Preston, UK
| | - P C Black
- Department of Urologic Sciences, Vancouver Prostate Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - B H Bochner
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York; Urology Service, Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - M Bolla
- Emeritus Professor of Radiation Oncology, Grenoble - Alpes University, Grenoble, France
| | - J L Boormans
- Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Bossi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France
| | - A Briganti
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Milan; Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - I Brummelhuis
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| | - M Burger
- Department of Urology, Caritas-St. Josef Medical Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - D Castellano
- Medical Oncology Department, 12 de Octubre University Hospital (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain
| | - R Cathomas
- Department Innere Medizin, Abteilung Onkologie und Hämatologie, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - A Chiti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan; Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - A Choudhury
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - E Compérat
- Department of Pathology, Tenon Hospital, HUEP, Paris; Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - S Crabb
- Cancer Sciences Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - S Culine
- Department of Cancer Medicine, Hôpital Saint Louis, Paris
| | - B De Bari
- Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire "Jean Minjoz" of Besançon, INSERM UMR 1098, Besançon, France; Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - W DeBlok
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - P J L De Visschere
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Division of Genitourinary Radiology and Mammography, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent
| | - K Decaestecker
- Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - K Dimitropoulos
- Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - J L Dominguez-Escrig
- Servicio de Urología, Fundación Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain
| | - S Fanti
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Policlinico S Orsola, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - V Fonteyne
- Department of Radiotherapy Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - M Frydenberg
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
| | - J J Futterer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - G Gakis
- Department of Urology and Paediatric Urology, University Hospital of Würzburg, Julius-Maximillians University, Würzburg, Germany
| | - B Geavlete
- Department of Urology, Saint John Emergency Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | - P Gontero
- Division of Urology, Molinette Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - B Grubmüller
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - S Hafeez
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - D E Hansel
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Diego Pathology, La Jolla, USA
| | - A Hartmann
- Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander University (FAU) Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - D Hayne
- Department of Urology, UWA Medical School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
| | - A M Henry
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - V Hernandez
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Fundación de Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain
| | - H Herr
- Urology Service, Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - K Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - P Hoskin
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Mount Vernon Centre for Cancer Treatment, London, UK
| | - J Huguet
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - B A Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan; Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - R Jones
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, College of Medicine, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - A M Kamat
- Department of Urology - Division of Surgery, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - V Khoo
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne; Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - A E Kiltie
- CRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - S Krege
- Department of Urology, Pediatric Urology and Urologic Oncology, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - S Ladoire
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Georges François Leclerc, Dijon, France
| | - P C Lara
- Department of Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Roque, Canarias; Universidad Fernando Pessoa, Canarias, Spain
| | - A Leliveld
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - V Løgager
- Department of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, Herlev, Denmark
| | - A Lorch
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Y Loriot
- Département de Médecine Oncologique, Gustave Roussy, INSERM U981, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - R Meijer
- UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, MS Oncologic Urology, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M Carmen Mir
- Servicio de Urología, Fundación Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain
| | - M Moschini
- Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - H Mostafid
- Department of Urology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | - A-C Müller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Germany
| | - C R Müller
- Cancer Treatment Centre, Sorlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - J N'Dow
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - A Necchi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Y Neuzillet
- Department of Urology, Hospital Foch, University of Versailles-Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Suresnes, France
| | - J R Oddens
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Oldenburg
- Department of Oncology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog; Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - S Osanto
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden
| | - W J G Oyen
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan; Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - L Pacheco-Figueiredo
- Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar São João, Porto; Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
| | - H Pappot
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - M I Patel
- Department of Urology, Westmead Hospital, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - B R Pieters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam
| | - K Plass
- EAU Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - M Remzi
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Retz
- Department of Urology, Rechts der Isar Medical Center, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - J Richenberg
- Department of Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton; Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - M Rink
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg
| | - F Roghmann
- Department of Urology, Ruhr-University Bochum, Marien Hospital, Herne, Germany
| | - J E Rosenberg
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA
| | - M Rouprêt
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne Université, GRC n°5, ONCOTYPE-URO, AP-HP, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris
| | - O Rouvière
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Service d'Imagerie Urinaire et Vasculaire, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon; Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, Faculté de Médecine Lyon Est, Lyon, France
| | - C Salembier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Europe Hospitals Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
| | - A Salminen
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Turku, Turku, Finland
| | - P Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France
| | - S Sengupta
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne; Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - A Sherif
- Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - R J Smeenk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A Smits
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| | - A Stenzl
- Department of Urology, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - G N Thalmann
- Department of Urology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Berne, Switzerland
| | - B Tombal
- Division of Urology, IREC, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCL, Brussels, Belgium
| | - B Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, USA
| | - S Vahr Lauridsen
- Department of Urology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - R Valdagni
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | | | - H Van Poppel
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M D Vartolomei
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, Targu Mures, Romania
| | - E Veskimäe
- Department of Urology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - A Vilaseca
- Uro-Oncology Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - F A Vives Rivera
- Clinica HematoOncologica Bonadona Prevenir, Universidad Metropolitana, Clinica Club de Leones, Barranquilla, Colombia
| | - T Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - P Wiklund
- Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Health System, New York City, USA; Department of Urology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - A Williams
- Department of Urology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - R Zigeuner
- Department of Urology, Medizinische Universität Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - J A Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Soria F, Pisano F, Gontero P, Palou J, Joniau S, Serretta V, Larré S, Di Stasi S, van Rhijn B, Witjes JA, Grotenhuis A, Colombo R, Briganti A, Babjuk M, Soukup V, Malmstrom PU, Irani J, Malats N, Baniel J, Mano R, Cai T, Cha E, Ardelt P, Varkarakis J, Bartoletti R, Dalbagni G, Shariat SF, Xylinas E, Karnes RJ, Sylvester R. Predictors of oncological outcomes in T1G3 patients treated with BCG who undergo radical cystectomy. World J Urol 2018; 36:1775-1781. [PMID: 30171454 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2450-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [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: 03/01/2018] [Accepted: 08/13/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the oncological impact of postponing radical cystectomy (RC) to allow further conservative therapies prior to progression in a large multicentre retrospective cohort of T1-HG/G3 patients initially treated with BCG. METHODS According to the time of RC, the population was divided into 3 groups: patients who did not progress to muscle-invasive disease, patients who progressed before radical cystectomy and patients who experienced progression at the time of radical cystectomy. Clinical and pathological outcomes were compared across the three groups. RESULTS Of 2451 patients, 509 (20.8%) underwent RC. Patients with tumors > 3 cm or with CIS had earlier cystectomies (HR = 1.79, p = 0.001 and HR = 1.53, p = 0.02, respectively). Patients with tumors > 3 cm, multiple tumors or CIS had earlier T3/T4 or N + cystectomies. In patients who progressed, the timing of cystectomy did not affect the risk of T3/T4 or N + disease at RC. Patients with T3/T4 or N + disease at RC had a shorter disease-specific survival (HR = 4.38, p < 0.001), as did patients with CIS at cystectomy (HR = 2.39, p < 0.001). Patients who progressed prior to cystectomy had a shorter disease-specific survival than patients for whom progression was only detected at cystectomy (HR = 0.58, p = 0.024) CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with RC before experiencing progression to muscle-invasive disease harbor better oncological and survival outcomes compared to those who progressed before RC and to those upstaged at surgery. Tumor size and concomitant CIS at diagnosis are the main predictors of surgical treatment while tumor size, CIS and tumor multiplicity are associated with extravesical disease at surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Soria
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Francesca Pisano
- Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, University of Studies of Turin, Turin, Italy. .,Department of Urology, Fundacio Puigvert, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Paolo Gontero
- Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, University of Studies of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - J Palou
- Department of Urology, Fundacio Puigvert, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - S Joniau
- Oncologic and Reconstructive Urology, Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Louvain, Belgium
| | - V Serretta
- Department of Surgical, Oncological and Stomatological Sciences, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - S Larré
- Department of Surgical Science, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - S Di Stasi
- Policlinico Tor Vergata-University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - B van Rhijn
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J A Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A Grotenhuis
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - R Colombo
- Dipartimento di Urologia, Università Vita-Salute. Ospedale S. Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - A Briganti
- Dipartimento di Urologia, Università Vita-Salute. Ospedale S. Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - M Babjuk
- Department of Urology, Motol Hospital, University of Praha, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - V Soukup
- Department of Urology, Motol Hospital, University of Praha, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - P U Malmstrom
- Department of Urology, Academic Hospital, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - J Irani
- Department of Urology, CHU de Bicêtre, 78, rue du Général Leclerc, 94270, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France
| | - N Malats
- Genetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain
| | - J Baniel
- Department of Urology, Rabin Medical Centre, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - R Mano
- Department of Urology, Rabin Medical Centre, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - T Cai
- Department of Urology, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy
| | - E Cha
- Department of Urology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University in New York City, New York, NY, USA
| | - P Ardelt
- Facharzt fur Urologie, Abteilung fur Urologie, Chirurgische Universitats klinik, Freiburg, Germany
| | - J Varkarakis
- Department of Urology, Sismanoglio Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - R Bartoletti
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - G Dalbagni
- Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Cochin Hospital, Paris, France
| | - R J Karnes
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - R Sylvester
- Formerly Department of Biostatistics, EORTC Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Leisser A, Nejabat M, Hartenbach M, Duan H, Shariat SF, Kramer G, Krainer M, Hacker M, Haug AR. Hematopoiesis is prognostic for toxicity and survival of 223Radium treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Hell J Nucl Med 2017; 20 Suppl:157. [PMID: 29324927] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2017] [Accepted: 10/10/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We evaluated the impact of pre-therapeutic hematopoiesis on survival, hematotoxicity (HT) and number of 223Radium (223Ra) treatments in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. SUBJECTS AND METHOD Hemoglobin-levels (Hb), the number of platelets (Plts), leukocytes (Leuk), and survival data were collected in 56 patients treated with 223Ra. Pre-therapeutic hematopoiesis as well as adverse events during and after therapy were scored (grade 0-4) according to the CTCAE recommendations. The association of pre-therapeutic hematopoiesis, survival, HT and numbers of 223Ra cycles was analyzed. RESULTS Median survival in all patients was 69.9 weeks; 77% of patients had pre-existing impaired Hb (1.7% grade 3, 12.5% grade 2, 62.5% grade 1). 8/56 (14.3%) had impaired Plt (grade 1) Maximum toxicity (Tox) grades of patients during treatment were grade 4 (Hb 1.7%; Plt 1.7%), grade 3 (Hb 14.3%; Plt 7.1%; Leu 7.1%), grade 2 (Hb 33.9%; Plt 7.1%; Leu 23.2%), grade 1 (Hb 46.4%; Plt 17.9%; Leu 23.2%) and grade 0 (Hb 5.4%; Plt 66.1%; Leu 44.6%). Interestingly, patients with thrombocytopenia had a significantly shorter survival compared to those with normal Plt levels (21 weeks vs not reached; P<0.003). As expected patients with pre-therapeutic low Hb-level (<10g/dL) had a significantly shorter survival compared to those with Hb-level >10g/dL (28 weeks vs not reached, P<0.004), whereas survival of patients with mildly impaired Hb (>10 but <13.5g/dL) did not differ from patients with normal levels of Hb (X vs. Y, P=...). Also patients with impaired Hb also developed significantly more grade 3 and 4 HT (Hb <10g/dL: 42.9 vs 14.3%, P<0.001; Plt <150G/mL: 25.0% vs 6.3%; P=0.002) and received significantly fewer treatment cycles (Hb<10g/dL: 5.1 vs 5.8, P<0.04; Plt <150G/mL: 3.4 vs 5.6; P<0.001). Neither extent of bone metastases nor previous chemotherapy were associated with survival, number of 223Ra cycles and HT. CONCLUSION Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and impaired hematopoiesis, in particular thrombocytopenia and anemia, before 223Ra therapy suffer from significantly more high-grade HT, shorter survival and receive significantly fewer 223Ra treatments. Therefore, Hb-levels and platelet counts are essential parameters for adequate patient selection for 223Ra therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Leisser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy Medical University, Vienna 1090, Vienna, Austria.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Mathieu R, Moschini M, Beyer B, Gust KM, Seisen T, Briganti A, Karakiewicz P, Seitz C, Salomon L, de la Taille A, Rouprêt M, Graefen M, Shariat SF. Prognostic value of the new Grade Groups in Prostate Cancer: a multi-institutional European validation study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2017; 20:197-202. [DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2016.66] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2016] [Revised: 09/29/2016] [Accepted: 10/24/2016] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
17
|
Wirth GJ, Haitel A, Moschini M, Soria F, Klatte T, Hassler MR, Bensalah K, Briganti A, Karam JA, Lotan Y, Margulis V, Raman JD, Remzi M, Rioux-Leclercq N, Robinson BD, Rouprêt M, Wood CG, Shariat SF. Androgen receptor expression is associated with adverse pathological features in ureteral but not in pelvicalyceal urothelial carcinomas of the upper urinary tract. World J Urol 2016; 35:943-949. [PMID: 27730305 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-016-1946-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [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: 04/27/2016] [Accepted: 09/27/2016] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aims to determine the significance of androgen receptor (AR) expression in urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract (UTUC). METHODS AR expression was assessed on tissue microarrays containing specimens of 737 patients with UTUC who underwent radical nephroureterectomy with curative intent. AR expression was correlated with clinical and pathological tumor features as well as recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, AR was expressed in 11 % of tumors. AR expression was significantly associated with tumor necrosis as well as sessile and multifocal tumor growth but not with RFS, CSS or OS. AR was detected nearly twice as often in tumors of the ureter than of the pelvicalyceal system (p = 0.005). Subgroup analyses showed that the significant associations of AR with unfavorable pathologic features were exclusively attributable to tumors located in the ureter. However, in both ureteral and pelvicalyceal tumors, AR status was independent of RFS, CSS and OS. CONCLUSIONS In this cohort of patients treated with RNU, AR expression was found in approximately 10 % of UTUCs, twice as often in ureteral than in pelvicalyceal tumors. While AR expression had no impact on postoperative prognosis, it was significantly associated with unfavorable pathologic features in ureteral tumors. Steroid hormone signaling might be relevant for future investigations of differences between ureteral and pelvicalyceal tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G J Wirth
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medizinische Universität Wien/Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.,Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - A Haitel
- Department of Clinical Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Moschini
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medizinische Universität Wien/Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - F Soria
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medizinische Universität Wien/Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.,Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - T Klatte
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medizinische Universität Wien/Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.,Karl-Landsteiner Institute for Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria
| | - M R Hassler
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medizinische Universität Wien/Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - K Bensalah
- Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - A Briganti
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - J A Karam
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Y Lotan
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - V Margulis
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - J D Raman
- Division of Urology, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| | - M Remzi
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medizinische Universität Wien/Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - N Rioux-Leclercq
- Department of Pathology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - B D Robinson
- Department of Pathology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - M Rouprêt
- Academic Department of Urology, La Pitié-Salpetrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Faculté de Médecine Pierre et Marie Curie, University Paris 6, Paris, France
| | - C G Wood
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medizinische Universität Wien/Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. .,Department of Urology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. .,Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
|
19
|
Pouessel D, Neuzillet Y, Mertens LS, van der Heijden MS, de Jong J, Sanders J, Peters D, Leroy K, Manceau A, Maille P, Soyeux P, Moktefi A, Semprez F, Vordos D, de la Taille A, Hurst CD, Tomlinson DC, Harnden P, Bostrom PJ, Mirtti T, Horenblas S, Loriot Y, Houédé N, Chevreau C, Beuzeboc P, Shariat SF, Sagalowsky AI, Ashfaq R, Burger M, Jewett MAS, Zlotta AR, Broeks A, Bapat B, Knowles MA, Lotan Y, van der Kwast TH, Culine S, Allory Y, van Rhijn BWG. Tumor heterogeneity of fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) mutations in invasive bladder cancer: implications for perioperative anti-FGFR3 treatment. Ann Oncol 2016; 27:1311-6. [PMID: 27091807 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdw170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [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: 02/04/2016] [Accepted: 04/06/2016] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) is an actionable target in bladder cancer. Preclinical studies show that anti-FGFR3 treatment slows down tumor growth, suggesting that this tyrosine kinase receptor is a candidate for personalized bladder cancer treatment, particularly in patients with mutated FGFR3. We addressed tumor heterogeneity in a large multicenter, multi-laboratory study, as this may have significant impact on therapeutic response. PATIENTS AND METHODS We evaluated possible FGFR3 heterogeneity by the PCR-SNaPshot method in the superficial and deep compartments of tumors obtained by transurethral resection (TUR, n = 61) and in radical cystectomy (RC, n = 614) specimens and corresponding cancer-positive lymph nodes (LN+, n = 201). RESULTS We found FGFR3 mutations in 13/34 (38%) T1 and 8/27 (30%) ≥T2-TUR samples, with 100% concordance between superficial and deeper parts in T1-TUR samples. Of eight FGFR3 mutant ≥T2-TUR samples, only 4 (50%) displayed the mutation in the deeper part. We found 67/614 (11%) FGFR3 mutations in RC specimens. FGFR3 mutation was associated with pN0 (P < 0.001) at RC. In 10/201 (5%) LN+, an FGFR3 mutation was found, all concordant with the corresponding RC specimen. In the remaining 191 cases, RC and LN+ were both wild type. CONCLUSIONS FGFR3 mutation status seems promising to guide decision-making on adjuvant anti-FGFR3 therapy as it appeared homogeneous in RC and LN+. Based on the results of TUR, the deep part of the tumor needs to be assessed if neoadjuvant anti-FGFR3 treatment is considered. We conclude that studies on the heterogeneity of actionable molecular targets should precede clinical trials with these drugs in the perioperative setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Pouessel
- Inserm U955, Hôpital Henri Mondor, APHP, Team 7 Translational Research of Genito-Urinary Oncogenesis, Créteil Department of Medical Oncology, Hôpital Saint-Louis, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | | | | | | | | | - J Sanders
- Pathology Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D Peters
- Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - P Soyeux
- Inserm U955, Hôpital Henri Mondor, APHP, Team 7 Translational Research of Genito-Urinary Oncogenesis, Créteil
| | | | - F Semprez
- Inserm U955, Hôpital Henri Mondor, APHP, Team 7 Translational Research of Genito-Urinary Oncogenesis, Créteil
| | - D Vordos
- Urology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, APHP, Créteil, France
| | - A de la Taille
- Inserm U955, Hôpital Henri Mondor, APHP, Team 7 Translational Research of Genito-Urinary Oncogenesis, Créteil Urology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, APHP, Créteil, France
| | - C D Hurst
- Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - D C Tomlinson
- Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - P Harnden
- Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - P J Bostrom
- Departments of Urology Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto
| | - T Mirtti
- Pathology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
| | | | - Y Loriot
- Department of Cancer Medicine and INSERM U981, Gustave Roussy, Cancer Campus, Grand Paris, Villejuif
| | - N Houédé
- Department of Oncological Medicine, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux
| | - C Chevreau
- Department of Oncological Medicine, Institut Claudius Régaud, Toulouse
| | - P Beuzeboc
- Department of Oncological Medicine, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - S F Shariat
- Departments of Urology Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - R Ashfaq
- Pathology, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA
| | - M Burger
- Department of Urology, Caritas St Josef Medical Centre, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - M A S Jewett
- Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto
| | - A R Zlotta
- Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto Departments of Surgery (Urology)
| | - A Broeks
- Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B Bapat
- Cancer Genetics, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto
| | - M A Knowles
- Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | | | - T H van der Kwast
- Department of Pathology, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - S Culine
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hôpital Saint-Louis, AP-HP, Paris, France Department of Medical Oncology, Paris 7 University, Paris
| | - Y Allory
- Inserm U955, Hôpital Henri Mondor, APHP, Team 7 Translational Research of Genito-Urinary Oncogenesis, Créteil Departments of Pathology Department of Pathology, Université Paris Est, UPEC, Créteil, France
| | - B W G van Rhijn
- Departments of Surgical Oncology (Urology) Department of Urology, Caritas St Josef Medical Centre, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto Departments of Surgery (Urology) Cancer Genetics, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Gandaglia G, Lista G, Fossati N, Suardi N, Gallina A, Moschini M, Bianchi L, Rossi MS, Schiavina R, Shariat SF, Salonia A, Montorsi F, Briganti A. Non-surgically related causes of erectile dysfunction after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2016; 19:185-90. [DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2016.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2015] [Revised: 11/11/2015] [Accepted: 12/08/2015] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
21
|
Sevcenco S, Mathieu R, Baltzer P, Klatte T, Fajkovic H, Seitz C, Karakiewicz PI, Rouprêt M, Rink M, Kluth L, Trinh QD, Loidl W, Briganti A, Scherr DS, Shariat SF. The prognostic role of preoperative serum C-reactive protein in predicting the biochemical recurrence in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2016; 19:163-7. [PMID: 26810014 DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2015.60] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2015] [Revised: 09/11/2015] [Accepted: 10/07/2015] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To assess the prognostic value of preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) serum levels for prognostication of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) in a large multi-institutional cohort. METHODS Data from 7205 patients treated with RP at five institutions for clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) were retrospectively analyzed. Preoperative serum levels of CRP within 24 h before surgery were evaluated. A CRP level ⩾0.5 mg dl(-1) was considered elevated. Associations of elevated CRP with BCR were evaluated using univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. Harrel's C-index was used to assess prognostic accuracy (PA). RESULTS Patients with higher Gleason score on biopsy and RP, extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node metastasis, and positive surgical margins status had a significantly elevated preoperative CRP compared to those without these features. Patients with elevated CRP had a lower 5-year BCR survival proportion as compared to those with normal CRP (55% vs 76%, respectively, P<0.0001). In pre- and postoperative multivariable models that adjusted for standard clinical and pathologic features, elevated CRP was independently associated with BCR (P<0.001). However, the addition of preoperative CRP did not improve the accuracy of the standard pre- and postoperative models for prediction of BCR (70.9% vs 71% and 78.9% vs 78.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Preoperative CRP is elevated in patients with pathological features of aggressive PCa and BCR after RP. While CRP has independent prognostic value, it does not add prognostically or clinically significant information to standard predictors of outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Sevcenco
- Department of Urology, Medical University Vienna, General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - R Mathieu
- Department of Urology, Medical University Vienna, General Hospital, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Urology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France
| | - P Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - T Klatte
- Department of Urology, Medical University Vienna, General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - H Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Medical University Vienna, General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - C Seitz
- Department of Urology, Medical University Vienna, General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - P I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | - M Rouprêt
- Academic Department of Urology, La Pitié-Salpetrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Faculté de Médecine Pierre et Marie Curie, University Paris 6, Paris, France
| | - M Rink
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - L Kluth
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Q-D Trinh
- School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA, USA.,Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - W Loidl
- Department of Urology, Krankenhaus der Barmherzigen Schwestern, Linz, Austria
| | - A Briganti
- Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - D S Scherr
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University Vienna, General Hospital, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Moschini M, Fossati N, Abdollah F, Gandaglia G, Cucchiara V, Dell'Oglio P, Luzzago S, Shariat SF, Dehò F, Salonia A, Montorsi F, Briganti A. Determinants of long-term survival of patients with locally advanced prostate cancer: the role of extensive pelvic lymph node dissection. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2015; 19:63-7. [DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2015.51] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2015] [Revised: 08/29/2015] [Accepted: 09/18/2015] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
23
|
Soave A, Engel O, Von Amsberg G, Becker A, Dahlem R, Shariat SF, Fisch M, Rink M. Management of advanced bladder cancer in the era of targeted therapies. MINERVA UROL NEFROL 2015; 67:103-115. [PMID: 25604695] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Systemic chemotherapy is the standard treatment of advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB). Unfortunately, systemic chemotherapy is ineffective in a significant number of patients, while side effects occur frequently. Detailed molecular-genetic investigations revealed a broad heterogeneity of underlying genomic mutations in UCB and led to the detection of cancer-specific therapeutic targets. These findings may allow a more tailored and individualized patient-based therapy, focusing on specific genomic variations, which may cause chemo-resistance in patients progressing or relapsing after standard chemotherapy. Targeted therapies hold the potential to be more effective in inhibiting cancer cell growth and progression, as well as to cause fewer side effects. While targeted therapies have been successfully established in the treatment of various malignancies including renal cell carcinoma, the clinical impact of these modern treatment strategies still remains unsettled for UCB. In this review, we comprehensively summarize the most current and relevant findings on targeted therapy in advanced and metastatic UCB, elucidating chances and limitations and discussing future perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Soave
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg‑Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany -
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Schiffmann J, Gandaglia G, Larcher A, Sun M, Tian Z, Shariat SF, McCormack M, Valiquette L, Montorsi F, Graefen M, Saad F, Karakiewicz PI. Contemporary 90-day mortality rates after radical cystectomy in the elderly. Eur J Surg Oncol 2014; 40:1738-45. [PMID: 25454826 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2014.10.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.1] [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: 06/21/2014] [Revised: 09/28/2014] [Accepted: 10/06/2014] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Existing radical cystectomy (RC) perioperative mortality estimates may underestimate the contemporary rates due to more advanced age, more baseline comorbidities and potentially broader inclusion criteria for RC, relative to past criteria. METHODS Within the most recent Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database we identified clinically non-metastatic, muscle-invasive (T2-T4a) urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder (UCUB) patients, who underwent RC between 1991 and 2009. Mortality at 30- and 90-day after RC was quantified. Multivariable logistic regression analyses tested predictors of 90-day mortality. RESULTS Within 5207 assessable RC patients 30- and 90-day mortality rates were 5.2 and 10.6%, respectively. According to age 65-69, 70-79 and ≥ 80 years, 90-day mortality rates were 6.4, 10.1 and 14.8% (p < 0.001). Additionally, 90-day mortality rates increased with increasing Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI, 0, 1, 2 and ≥ 3): 6.3, 10.3, 12.6 and 15.9% (p < 0.001). 90-day mortality rate in unmarried patients was 13.0 vs. 9.3% in married individuals (p < 0.001). In multivariable logistic regression analyses, advanced age, higher CCI, low socioeconomic status, unmarried status and non organ-confined stage were independent predictors of 90-day mortality (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The contemporary SEER-Medicare derived 90-day mortality rates are substantially higher than previously reported estimates from centers of excellence, and even exceed previous SEER reports. More advanced age, higher CCI score, and other patient characteristics that distinguish the current population from others account for these differences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Schiffmann
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada; Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
| | - G Gandaglia
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada; Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Department of Urology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - A Larcher
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada; Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Department of Urology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - M Sun
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - Z Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M McCormack
- Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - L Valiquette
- Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - F Montorsi
- Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Department of Urology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - M Graefen
- Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - F Saad
- Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| | - P I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada; Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Rieken M, Xylinas E, Kluth L, Trinh QD, Lee RK, Fajkovic H, Novara G, Margulis V, Lotan Y, Martinez-Salamanca JI, Matsumoto K, Seitz C, Remzi M, Karakiewicz PI, Scherr DS, Briganti A, Kautzky-Willer A, Bachmann A, Shariat SF. Diabetes mellitus without metformin intake is associated with worse oncologic outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013; 40:113-20. [PMID: 24113620 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.09.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [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: 07/03/2013] [Revised: 09/04/2013] [Accepted: 09/10/2013] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
AIMS Evidence suggests a detrimental effect of diabetes mellitus (DM) on cancer incidence and outcomes. To date, the effect of DM and its treatment on prognosis in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) remains uninvestigated. We tested the hypothesis that DM and metformin use impact oncologic outcomes of patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for UTUC. METHODS Retrospective analysis of 2492 patients with UTUC treated at 23 institutions with RNU without neoadjuvant therapy. Cox regression models addressed the association of DM and metformin use with disease recurrence, cancer-specific mortality and any-cause mortality. RESULTS A total of 365 (14.3%) patients had DM and 194 (7.8%) patients used metformin. Within a median follow-up of 36 months, 663 (26.6%) patients experienced disease recurrence, 545 patients (21.9%) died of UTUC and 884 (35.5%) patients died from any cause. Diabetic patients who did not use metformin were at significantly higher risk of disease recurrence and cancer-specific death compared to non-diabetic patients and diabetic patients who used metformin. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, DM treated without metformin was associated with worse recurrence-free survival (HR: 1.44, 95% CI 1.10-1.90, p = 0.009) and cancer-specific mortality (HR: 1.49, 95% CI 1.11-2.00, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS Diabetic UTUC patients without metformin use have significantly worse oncologic outcomes than diabetics who used metformin and non-diabetics. The possible mechanism behind the impact of DM on UTUC biology and the potentially protective effect of metformin need further elucidation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Rieken
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - L Kluth
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Q-D Trinh
- Division of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - R K Lee
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - H Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - G Novara
- Department of Surgical, Oncological and Gastroenterologic Sciences, Urology Clinic, University of Padua, Italy
| | - V Margulis
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Y Lotan
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - J I Martinez-Salamanca
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - K Matsumoto
- Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - C Seitz
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Remzi
- Department of Urology, Landesklinikum Korneuburg, Korneuburg, Austria
| | - P I Karakiewicz
- Department of Urology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - D S Scherr
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - A Briganti
- Department of Urology, Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy
| | - A Kautzky-Willer
- Unit of Gender Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - A Bachmann
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Xylinas E, Kent M, Kluth L, Pycha A, Comploj E, Svatek RS, Lotan Y, Trinh QD, Karakiewicz PI, Holmang S, Scherr DS, Zerbib M, Vickers AJ, Shariat SF. Accuracy of the EORTC risk tables and of the CUETO scoring model to predict outcomes in non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Br J Cancer 2013; 109:1460-6. [PMID: 23982601 PMCID: PMC3776972 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.372] [Citation(s) in RCA: 168] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2013] [Revised: 06/13/2013] [Accepted: 06/22/2013] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk tables and the Spanish Urological Club for Oncological Treatment (CUETO) scoring model are the two best-established predictive tools to help decision making for patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). The aim of the current study was to assess the performance of these predictive tools in a large multicentre cohort of NMIBC patients. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 4689 patients with NMIBC. To evaluate the discrimination of the models, we created Cox proportional hazard regression models for time to disease recurrence and progression. We incorporated the patients calculated risk score as a predictor into both of these models and then calculated their discrimination (concordance indexes). We compared the concordance index of our models with the concordance index reported for the models. Results: With a median follow-up of 57 months, 2110 patients experienced disease recurrence and 591 patients experienced disease progression. Both tools exhibited a poor discrimination for disease recurrence and progression (0.597 and 0.662, and 0.523 and 0.616, respectively, for the EORTC and CUETO models). The EORTC tables overestimated the risk of disease recurrence and progression in high-risk patients. The discrimination of the EORTC tables was even lower in the subgroup of patients treated with BCG (0.554 and 0.576 for disease recurrence and progression, respectively). Conversely, the discrimination of the CUETO model increased in BCG-treated patients (0.597 and 0.645 for disease recurrence and progression, respectively). However, both models overestimated the risk of disease progression in high-risk patients. Conclusion: The EORTC risk tables and the CUETO scoring system exhibit a poor discrimination for both disease recurrence and progression in NMIBC patients. These models overestimated the risk of disease recurrence and progression in high-risk patients. These overestimations remained in BCG-treated patients, especially for the EORTC tables. These results underline the need for improving our current predictive tools. However, our study is limited by its retrospective and multi-institutional design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Xylinas
- 1] Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA [2] Department of Urology, Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Xylinas E, Cha EK, Sun M, Rink M, Trinh QD, Novara G, Green DA, Pycha A, Fradet Y, Daneshmand S, Svatek RS, Fritsche HM, Kassouf W, Scherr DS, Faison T, Crivelli JJ, Tagawa ST, Zerbib M, Karakiewicz PI, Shariat SF. Risk stratification of pT1-3N0 patients after radical cystectomy for adjuvant chemotherapy counselling. Br J Cancer 2013; 107:1826-32. [PMID: 23169335 PMCID: PMC3504939 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In pT1-T3N0 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB) patients, multi-modal therapy is inconsistently recommended. The aim of the study was to develop a prognostic tool to help decision-making regarding adjuvant therapy. METHODS We included 2145 patients with pT1-3N0 UCB after radical cystectomy (RC), naive of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. The cohort was randomly split into development cohort based on the US patients (n=1067) and validation cohort based on the Europe patients (n=1078). Predictive accuracy was quantified using the concordance index. RESULTS With a median follow-up of 45 months, 5-year recurrence-free and cancer-specific survival estimates were 68% and 73%, respectively. pT-stage, ge, lymphovascular invasion, and positive margin were significantly associated with both disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality (P-values ≤ 0.005). The accuracies of the multivariable models at 2, 5, and 7 years for predicting disease recurrence were 67.4%, 65%, and 64.4%, respectively. Accuracies at 2, 5, and 7 years for predicting cancer-specific mortality were 69.3%, 66.4%, and 65.5%, respectively. We developed competing-risk, conditional probability nomograms. External validation revealed minor overestimation. CONCLUSION Despite RC, a significant number of patients with pT1-3N0 UCB experience disease recurrence and ultimately die of UCB. We developed and externally validated competing-risk, conditional probability post-RC nomograms for prediction of disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Starr 900, 525 East 68th Street, Box 94, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Rink M, Chun FKH, Robinson B, Sun M, Karakiewicz PI, Bensalah K, Fisch M, Scherr DS, Lee RK, Margulis V, Shariat SF. Tissue-based molecular markers for renal cell carcinoma. MINERVA UROL NEFROL 2011; 63:293-308. [PMID: 21996985] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/31/2023]
Abstract
Since the introduction of targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), more individualized treatment options have become available. Molecular markers might support treatment planning due to more accurate individual risk stratification. Current molecular markers in RCC were reviewed to elucidate clinical impact and future perspectives. An English-language literature review of the Medline database (1990 to September 2010) of published data on tissue-based molecular markers and RCC was undertaken. Histological types, clinical and oncological behaviour are variable in renal masses. Molecular markers offer potential for additional information in tumour detection and diagnosis, prognostic and predictive values, as well as determination of therapeutic targets. Investigations on molecular biomarkers in RCC include hypoxia inducible factor (HIF-α), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), survivin, B7-H1, p53, matrix metalloproteinases (MMP), Insulin-like growth factor II mRNA-binding protein 3 (IMP3), Ki-67, C-reactive protein (CRP), Vimentin, Fascin, platelet count, hemoglobin level and combinations of these factors. Although some markers offer promising results, utilization in daily practice is compromised due to limited specificity, predictive accuracy and tumour histology variablity. There is an imminent need for novel molecular markers that allow accurate histologic and biologic classification of RCC to improve upon current outcomes. It is very likely that a panel of molecular markers will be used to achieve a sufficient degree of certainty in order to guide clinical decisions. A large concerted effort is required to advance the field of RCC molecular marker through systematic discovery, verification, and validation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Rink
- Department of Urology, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Brookman-May S, May M, Zigeuner R, Shariat SF, Scherr DS, Chromecki T, Moch H, Wild PJ, Mohamad-Al-Ali B, Cindolo L, Wieland WF, Schips L, De Cobelli O, Rocco B, Santoro L, De Nunzio C, Tubaro A, Coman I, Feciche B, Truss M, Dalpiaz O, Hohenfellner M, Gilfrich C, Wirth MP, Burger M, Pahernik S. Collecting system invasion and Fuhrman grade but not tumor size facilitate prognostic stratification of patients with pT2 renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 2011; 186:2175-81. [PMID: 22014800 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2011] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The 7th edition of TNM for renal cell carcinoma introduced a subdivision of pT2 tumors at a 10 cm cutoff. In the present multicenter study the influence of tumor size as well as further clinical and histopathological parameters on cancer specific survival in patients with pT2 tumors was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 670 consecutive patients with pT2 tumors (10.4%) of 6,442 surgically treated patients with all tumor stages were pooled (mean followup 71.4 months). Tumors were reclassified according to the current TNM classification, and subdivided in stages pT2a and pT2b. Cancer specific survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and univariable and multivariable analyses were used to assess the influence of several parameters on survival. RESULTS Tumor size continuously applied and subdivided at 10 cm or alternative cutoffs did not significantly influence cancer specific survival. In addition to N/M stage, Fuhrman grade and collecting system invasion also had an independent influence on survival. Integration of a dichotomous variable subsuming Fuhrman grade and collecting system invasion (grade 3/4 and/or collecting system invasion present vs grade 1/2 and collecting system invasion absent) into multivariate models including established prognostic parameters resulted in improvement of predictive abilities by 11% (HR 2.3, p <0.001) for all pT2 cases and 151% (HR 3.1, p <0.001) for stage pT2N0M0 cases. CONCLUSIONS Tumor size did not have a significant influence on cancer specific survival in pT2 tumors, neither continuously applied nor based on various cutoff values. To enhance prognostic discrimination, multifactorial staging systems including pathological features should be implemented. The prognostic relevance of the variable subsuming Fuhrman grade and collecting system invasion should be considered for future evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Brookman-May
- Department of Urology, University Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Bianchi M, Sun M, Jeldres C, Shariat SF, Trinh QD, Briganti A, Tian Z, Schmitges J, Graefen M, Perrotte P, Menon M, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz PI. Distribution of metastatic sites in renal cell carcinoma: a population-based analysis. Ann Oncol 2011; 23:973-80. [PMID: 21890909 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr362] [Citation(s) in RCA: 429] [Impact Index Per Article: 33.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We assessed the distribution of site-specific metastases in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) according to age. Moreover, we evaluated recommendations proposed by guidelines and focused specifically on bone and brain metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) were abstracted from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (1998-2007). Age was stratified into four groups: <55, 55-64, 65-74 and ≥ 75 years. Cochran-Armitage trend test and multivariable logistic regression analysis tested the relationship between age and the rate of multiple metastatic sites. Finally, we examined the rates of brain or bone metastases according to the presence of other metastatic sites. RESULTS In 11,157 mRCC patients, the rate of multiple metastatic sites decreased with increasing age (P < 0.001). This phenomenon was confirmed in patients with lung, bone, liver and brain metastases (all P ≤ 0.01). The rate of bone metastases was 10% in patients with exclusive abdominal metastases and 49% in patients with abdominal, thoracic and brain metastases. The rate of brain metastases was 2% in patients with exclusive abdominal metastases and 16% in patients with thoracic and bone metastases. CONCLUSIONS The proportion of patients with multiple metastatic sites is higher in young patients. The rates of bone (10%-49%) and brain (2%-16%) metastases are nonnegligible in mRCC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Bianchi
- Department of Urology, Vita-Salute University, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Abdollah F, Sun M, Shariat SF, Schmitges J, Djahangirian O, Tian Z, Jeldres C, Perrotte P, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz PI. The importance of pelvic lymph node dissection in the elderly population: implications for interpreting the 2010 national comprehensive cancer network practice guidelines for bladder cancer treatment. Int Braz J Urol 2011. [DOI: 10.1590/s1677-55382011000300029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- F Abdollah
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - M Sun
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - SF Shariat
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - J Schmitges
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - O Djahangirian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - Z Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - C Jeldres
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - P Perrotte
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | - F Montorsi
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Canada; Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Gupta A, Shariat SF, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Vickers AJ, Lilja H. The knowledge and practices of urologists in the United States (US) about standardization of PSA assays. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.7_suppl.207] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
207 Background: PSA assays can be calibrated to either the WHO or the Hybritech standard. Studies of PSA-based prostate cancer screening have used Hybritech-standardized assays and prostate cancer risk calculators are based on these studies. Testing of patient samples with a WHO calibrated assay gives values that are 22% lower than from those with Hybritech-calibrated assays. Up to 60% of the labs in the US use WHO calibrated assays. We evaluated whether US urologists are aware of the different calibrators and the differences in PSA values. Methods: A random sample of 1,742 US urologists were invited by email to participate in a web-based survey of their knowledge and practices regarding PSA assay standardization. No mention was made of assays or calibration in the invitation. 419 responses were received. Results: Many (56%) US urologists thought that different standards may lead to clinically relevant differences in PSA values. Although 62% reported awareness of the two PSA calibrators, 67% did not know the difference between the two. Only 17% correctly reported the difference between the two standards. Nationally almost 60% of the labs use WHO standardized assays, but in this survey only 5% of the urologists thought that the hospital where they practice used a WHO standardized assay. The rest reported either not knowing the standard (46%) or use of the Hybritech standard (49%). The majority of urologists did not look at the reference range (64%) or for the PSA standard (74%) in the lab reports. Only 25% reported considering the PSA-calibration in their clinical decisions about prostate biopsy, but only a third of them correctly knew the difference between the calibrators. Conclusions: Many US urologists are unaware of the difference caused by WHO versus Hybritech based PSA-assay calibration. Although 60% of clinical laboratories use WHO-calibrated assays, only 5% of urologists are aware of this use in their practice, and a majority of urologists could not correctly explain the difference between the different calibrators. A greater awareness is needed amongst US urologists about the different PSA calibrators, the calibrator in use at their practice, and means to account for different calibrators in clinical decision making. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. Gupta
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - S. F. Shariat
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - J. A. Eastham
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - P. T. Scardino
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - A. J. Vickers
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - H. Lilja
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Chromecki TF, Svatek RS, Holmäng S, Karakiewicz PI, Mazumdar M, Dunning A, Kamat AM, Tagawa ST, Scherr D, Shariat SF. Prognostic factors of cancer recurrence and progression in non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma: A multicenter study of over 4,300 patients. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.7_suppl.249] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
249 Background: The outcomes of patients with non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (NMIUCB) remain poorly understood. The aim of our study was to identify prognostic factors of cancer recurrence and progression in patients with primary UCB. Methods: We performed a combined analysis on individual data from 4,325 patients with primary NMIUCB. Results: Within a median follow-up of 64 months, 1,960 patients (45.4%) experienced disease recurrence, 498 (11.5%) experienced progression to muscle-invasive stage, 1,155 (26.7%) died of any cause, and 310 (7.2%) died of their cancer. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, advanced age, higher grade, larger tumor size, higher number of tumors, number of prior recurrences, and type of intravesical therapy were independent predictors of disease recurrence and progression. While treatment intravesical chemotherapy was only associated with decreased/delayed cancer recurrence, intravesical BCG therapy was associated with decreased/delayed cancer recurrence and progression. The predictive accuracies of the models for recurrence and progression were 63.5% and 71.3%, respectively. Conclusions: Even in a heterogenous patient population, BCG therapy appears to decrease frequency and delay time to cancer recurrence and progression in patients with NMIUCB. Predictive tools based on combination of multiple clinical variables which capture the biological and clinical potential of nonmuscle-invasive disease could help with patient counseling and individualized risk assessment for adjuvant intravesical therapy and clinical trial design. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T. F. Chromecki
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - R. S. Svatek
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - S. Holmäng
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - P. I. Karakiewicz
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - M. Mazumdar
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - A. Dunning
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - A. M. Kamat
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - S. T. Tagawa
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - D. Scherr
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - S. F. Shariat
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Cha EK, Tirsar L, Shariat SF, Christos PJ, Mazumdar M, Hennenlotter J, Schwentner C, Mian C, Lodde M, Schmitz-Drager BJ. Use of immunocytology to predict bladder cancer presence in patients with asymptomatic hematuria. J Clin Oncol 2011. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.29.7_suppl.242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
242 Background: The uCyt immunocytology assay detects cellular biomarkers for bladder cancer (BCa) in exfoliated urothelial cells. We assessed the performance of uCy for detecting BCa in patients undergoing initial evaluation for asymptomatic hematuria. Methods: Data from 1,182 subjects without a history of BCa undergoing evaluation for hematuria were collected at three centers: EuromedClinic/Urologie24, University of Tübingen, and Central Hospital of Bolzano. All subjects underwent standard workup (i.e., voided cytology, upper tract imaging, and cystoscopy) and immunocytology. Results: Overall, 245 subjects had BCa (20.7%). The sensitivity/specificity/negative predictive value for uCyt and cytology were 82.4%/86.6%/95.0% and 46.5%/94.9%/87.2%, respectively. uCyt (OR 18.3, p<0.001) and cytology (OR 2.9, p<0.001) were associated with BCa in a multivariable analysis. The base model (age, gender, smoking status, type of hematuria) predicted BCa with an accuracy of 74.1%. Addition of cytology to the base model improved predictive accuracy (PA) to 83.5% (p<0.001), while addition of uCyt to the base model improved PA to 90.1% (p<0.001). Addition of uCyt to Model 1 significantly improved PA (+7.6%, p<0.001), but addition of cytology to Model 2 did not (+1.0%, p=0.057). uCyt performed equally well in patients with microscopic and gross hematuria (OR 30 vs. 27), while cytology did not (OR 18 vs. 12). Conclusions: uCyt is a strong, independent predictor of BCa in patients with hematuria; it outperforms cytology. uCyt may help with patient counseling, quality of care optimization (referral prioritization), and possibly sparing unnecessary hematuria workup in patients at extremely low risk of BCa. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E. K. Cha
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - L. Tirsar
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - S. F. Shariat
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - P. J. Christos
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - M. Mazumdar
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - J. Hennenlotter
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - C. Schwentner
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - C. Mian
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - M. Lodde
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| | - B. J. Schmitz-Drager
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; EuromedClinic, Furth, Germany; University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; Central Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Barbieri CE, Lotan Y, Lee RK, Sonpavde G, Karakiewicz PI, Robinson B, Scherr DS, Shariat SF. Tissue-based molecular markers for bladder cancer. MINERVA UROL NEFROL 2010; 62:241-258. [PMID: 20940694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
Bladder cancer is the second most common genitourinary malignancy in the United States, and is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Despite aggressive treatment, survival for patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder remains poor. Cancer stage, grade, and other clinical and pathological characteristics provide only limited prognostic information, and there is significant heterogeneity in patient outcomes using current risk stratification. Recent research into the profiling of bladder cancer at the molecular level has begun to shed light on important mechanisms of pathogenesis, as well as providing a number of potential tissue markers. These may provide useful prognostic information and guide patient selection for therapeutic strategies. This review explores recent advances in tissue-based molecular markers in bladder cancer and their potential utility. We also discuss design and statistical consideration for development and validation of molecular markers. A combination of complementary and yet independent molecular markers will likely better capture the biologic potential of each individual bladder tumor resulting in improved clinical decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C E Barbieri
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Mazzola CRE, Ghoneim T, Shariat SF. [Emerging biomarkers for the diagnosis, staging and prognosis of prostate cancer]. Prog Urol 2010; 21:1-10. [PMID: 21193139 DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2010.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2010] [Accepted: 07/01/2010] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
The introduction and widespread adoption of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has revolutionized the way prostate cancer is diagnosed and treated. However, the use of PSA has also led to overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer resulting in controversy about its use for screening. PSA also has limited predictive accuracy for predicting outcomes after treatment and for making clinical decisions about adjuvant and salvage therapies. Hence, there is an urgent need for novel biomarkers to supplement PSA for detection and management of prostate cancer. A plethora of promising blood- and urine-based biomarkers have shown promise in early studies and are at various stages of development (Human kallikrein 2, Early Prostate Cancer Antigen, Transforming Growth Factor-Beta 1 and Interleukin-6, Endoglin, PCA3, AMACR and ETS Gene Fusions). In this article, we review those biomarkers and then discuss the challenges a biomarker has to undergo before it is approved in a clinical use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C R E Mazzola
- Department of Clinical Laboratories, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York Avenue, New York City, NY 10065, États-Unis.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Sonpavde G, Khan MM, Lerner SP, Svatek RS, Skinner EC, Karakiewicz PI, Kassouf W, Dinney CP, Fradet Y, Shariat SF. Correlation of disease-free survival at 2 to 3 years and 5-year overall survival in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy. J Clin Oncol 2010. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.4576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
38
|
Nuss GR, Morey AF, Jenkins AC, Pruitt JH, Dugi DD, Morse B, Shariat SF. Radiographic predictors of need for angiographic embolization after traumatic renal injury. Int Braz J Urol 2009. [DOI: 10.1590/s1677-55382009000600017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
|
39
|
Hellenthal N, Shariat SF, Margulis V, Karakiewicz PI, Roscigno M, Bolenz C, Remzi M, Weizer A, Zigeuner R, Koppie TM. Adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma: Results from the Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Collaboration. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.5075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5075 Background: There is relatively little literature regarding the use of adjuvant chemotherapy following radical nephroureterectomy in the management of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Our goal was to determine the incidence of receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk patients and the ensuing effect on overall- and cancer-specific survival. Methods: Using an international collaborative database, we identified 1390 patients who underwent nephroureterectomy for non-metastatic UTUC between the years of 1992 and 2006. Of these, 542 (39%) patients were classified as high-risk (pT3N0, pT4N0, and/or lymph node positive). These patients were separated into two groups—those who did and did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy—and were stratified by gender, age group, performance status, tumor grade and stage. Cox proportional hazard modeling and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to determine overall- and cancer-specific survival amongst the cohorts. Results: Of the high-risk patients, 121 (22%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy was more commonly administered in the context of increased tumor grade and stage (p < 0.001). Median survival in the entire cohort was 24 months (range 0–231 months). There was no significant difference in overall- or cancer-specific survival between those who did and did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy; however age, performance status, tumor grade, and tumor stage were significant predictors of both overall and cancer-specific survival. Conclusions: Adjuvant chemotherapy is infrequently utilized in the treatment of patients with high-risk UTUC after nephroureterectomy. Despite this, it appears that adjuvant chemotherapy confers minimal impact on overall- or cancer-specific survival in this group. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N. Hellenthal
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - S. F. Shariat
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - V. Margulis
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - P. I. Karakiewicz
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - M. Roscigno
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - C. Bolenz
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - M. Remzi
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - A. Weizer
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - R. Zigeuner
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - T. M. Koppie
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy; Universitatsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany; University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Isbarn H, Sonpavde G, Shariat SF, Palapattu GS, Sagalowsky AI, Lotan Y, Schoenberg MP, Amiel GE, Lerner SP, Karakiewicz PI. Residual pathologic stage at radical cystectomy and risk stratification of patients with pT2N0 bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.5076] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5076 Background: We hypothesized that in patients with pT2N0 transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urinary bladder, residual muscle-invasive disease at radical cystectomy (RC) may confer poorer outcomes than residual non-muscle invasive disease due to larger tumor volume and/or biologically more aggressive disease. Patients with high-risk pT2N0 disease may be candidates for trials of adjuvant therapy. Methods: Patients from the BCRC database with pT2N0 stage (N = 208) at TUR (transurethral resection) whose tumors were organ-confined at RC (≤pT2N0) were analyzed. T1N0 patients (N=33) with pT2 disease at RC were also examined in order to include all pT2 patients. None of the patients had received perioperative chemotherapy. The effect of residual pT-stage at RC on outcomes was evaluated in Kaplan-Meier, as well as in univariable and multivariable Cox-regression models. Covariates consisted of age, gender, grade, lymphovascular invasion, concomitant carcinoma-in-situ (CIS), number of lymph nodes removed, and the year of surgery. Results: Among baseline T2N0 patients, residual pT-stage at RC was pT0 in 24 (11.5%), pTa in 9 (4.3%), pCIS in 22 (10.6%), pT1 in 35 (16.8%), and pT2 in 118 patients (56.7%). The median follow-up was 50.1 months. The 5-year recurrence-free survivals of patients with residual pT0/pTa/pCis, pT1 and pT2 were 100%, 85% and 75%, respectively. The 5-year cancer-specific survival rates for the same patient cohorts were 100%, 93%, and 81%, respectively. In multivariable analyses, the effect of residual stage <pT2 at RC achieved independent predictor status for recurrence (adjusted HR 0.20; p = 0.002), as well as for cancer-specific survival (adjusted HR: 0.24; p = 0.02). Initial T1 patients who were pT2 at RC did not have statistically different outcomes compared to initial T2 followed by pT2 at RC. Conclusions: Patients with pT2N0 TCC of the urinary bladder with residual non-muscle invasive disease at RC have significantly better long-term outcomes compared to residual muscle-invasive disease. With further validation, these data may facilitate the risk-stratification of patients with pT2N0 disease and enable the selection of high-risk patients for trials of adjuvant therapy. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H. Isbarn
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - G. Sonpavde
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - S. F. Shariat
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - G. S. Palapattu
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - A. I. Sagalowsky
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - Y. Lotan
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - M. P. Schoenberg
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - G. E. Amiel
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - S. P. Lerner
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - P. I. Karakiewicz
- University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada; Texas Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Margulis V, Lotan Y, Karakiewicz PI, Fradet Y, Ashfaq R, Capitanio U, Montorsi F, Bastian PJ, Nielsen ME, Muller SC, Rigaud J, Heukamp LC, Netto G, Lerner SP, Sagalowsky AI, Shariat SF. Multi-Institutional Validation of the Predictive Value of Ki-67 Labeling Index in Patients With Urinary Bladder Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101:114-9. [DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djn451] [Citation(s) in RCA: 120] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
|
42
|
Svatek RS, Lotan Y, Karakiewizc PI, Shariat SF. Screening for bladder cancer using urine-based tumor markers. MINERVA UROL NEFROL 2008; 60:247-253. [PMID: 18923361] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
Bladder cancer screening differs from routine detection of bladder cancer in patients with symptoms, such as hematuria, or a history of bladder cancer. The ultimate goal of cancer screening is to decrease cancer-related mortality by detecting disease prior to the time that the disease would normally prompt evaluation from symptoms. There are several features of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder which make screening for this disease an attractive alternative to the current approach to this disease. The disease targets a defined population and survival for patients with this disease is strongly associated with disease stage at presentation. In addition, quick, easy, and painless screening tests are theoretically possible using tumor-related markers because of the direct exposure of cancer cells to urine. Indeed, recent insights into the biology of bladder cancer initiation and progression have resulted in the identification of several urine-based markers which have promise for detecting the presence of bladder cancer. Nevertheless, adoption of screening programs prior to establishing evidence of effectiveness and large-scale financial considerations has substantial damaging consequences. This article reviews the current literature regarding screening for bladder cancer using urine-based markers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R S Svatek
- Department of Urologic Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Herman MP, Svatek RS, Lotan Y, Karakiewizc PI, Shariat SF. Urine-based biomarkers for the early detection and surveillance of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. MINERVA UROL NEFROL 2008; 60:217-235. [PMID: 18923359] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
Bladder cancer has a very high frequency of recurrence and therefore requires lifelong surveillance, traditionally consisting of serial cystoscopy and cytology. These tests are both invasive and expensive, with considerable inter-user and inter-institutional variability. In addition, the sensitivity of cytology in detecting low-grade tumors is low. Therefore, there has been active investigation into urinary biomarkers that can either supplement or supplant these tests. At this point there are only six urine-based tests that are FDA-approved in bladder cancer surveillance, but a wide variety of other biomarkers are being studied. In this review, we examine the natural history of bladder cancer as well as the rationale and performance of an ideal urinary biomarker. The authors describe the FDA-approved biomarkers such as Bladder Tumor Antigen, ImmunoCyt, Nuclear Matrix Protein-22, and Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization, as well as the most promising investigational tests (i.e., Urinary bladder cancer test, BLCA-1, BLCA-4, hyaluronic acid, hyaluronidase, Lewis X antigen, microsatellite analysis, Quanticyt, soluble Fas, Survivin, and telomerase). The biological foundation, methodologies, and diagnostic performance of the biomarkers are discussed. The characteristics of the biomarkers are compared to urine cytology. At this time, urine biomarkers are utilized in a variety of clinical situations but their role is not well defined. The goal of identifying an optimal marker that will replace cystoscopy and/or cytology is still ongoing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M P Herman
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Shariat SF, Kim JH, Andrews B, Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Kim IY, Lerner SP, Slawin KM. Preoperative plasma levels of transforming growth factor beta(1) strongly predict clinical outcome in patients with bladder carcinoma. Cancer 2001; 92:2985-92. [PMID: 11753975 DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(20011215)92:12<2985::aid-cncr10175>3.0.co;2-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Elevated local and circulating levels of transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta(1) have been associated with cancer invasion, progression, and metastasis. The authors tested the hypothesis that preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) levels would independently predict cancer stage and prognosis in patients with transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urinary bladder. METHODS The study group consisted of 51 patients who underwent radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive or intravesical immuno- and/or chemotherapy refractory Tis, Ta, or T1 TCC (median follow-up, 45.7 months). Preoperative plasma levels of TGF-beta(1) were measured and correlated with pathologic features and clinical outcome. Transforming growth factor-beta(1) levels also were measured in 44 healthy men without any cancer. RESULTS The mean preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) level in patients who eventually developed metastases to distant (11.9 +/- 0.9 ng/mL) or regional (9.6 +/- 2.4 ng/mL) lymph nodes was significantly higher than that in patients with nonmetastatic muscle-invasive TCC (5.4 +/- 1.1 ng/mL), which, in turn, was significantly higher than that in patients with nonmetastatic Tis, Ta, or T1 TCC (4.5 +/- 1.2 ng/mL) and healthy subjects (4.5 +/- 1.2 ng/mL; P < 0.001). Preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) level was an independent predictor of lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.002), metastases to lymph nodes (P = 0.030), disease recurrence (P = 0.009), and disease specific survival (P = 0.015). In a subgroup of patients with muscle-invasive TCC, TGF-beta(1) level was associated with disease recurrence (P = 0.005) and death from bladder carcinoma (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The authors confirm that plasma TGF-beta(1) levels are elevated in patients with muscle-invasive TCC before cystectomy. Transforming growth factor-beta(1) levels are highest in patients with bladder carcinoma metastatic to lymph nodes and are a strong independent predictor of disease recurrence and disease specific mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S F Shariat
- Matsunaga-Conte Prostate Cancer Research Center, the Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Shariat SF, Andrews B, Kattan MW, Kim J, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM. Plasma levels of interleukin-6 and its soluble receptor are associated with prostate cancer progression and metastasis. Urology 2001; 58:1008-15. [PMID: 11744478 DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01405-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 190] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Elevated circulating levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6) have been associated with cancer metastasis. IL-6 binds either to membrane or to soluble IL-6 receptor (IL-6sR), which then induces homodimerization of gp130 that activates downstream signaling. We tested the hypothesis that preoperative plasma IL-6 and IL-6sR levels are associated with prostate cancer stage, progression, and metastasis after radical prostatectomy. METHODS Plasma levels of IL-6 and IL-6sR were measured in 120 consecutive patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer, 44 healthy men without any cancer, 19 men with prostate cancer metastatic to the regional lymph nodes, and 10 men with prostate cancer metastatic to bone. RESULTS Plasma IL-6 and IL-6sR levels were highest in patients with bone metastases (P <0.001). The preoperative IL-6 and IL-6sR levels were associated with the preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (P </=0.041), prostatectomy tumor volume (P </=0.048), and final Gleason sum (P </=0.042). The preoperative IL-6 and IL-6sR levels and biopsy Gleason sum were independent predictors of PSA progression (P </=0.029). However, in a model that included both IL-6 and IL-6sR, only IL-6sR and the biopsy Gleason sum predicted progression (P </=0.040). In patients whose disease progressed, the preoperative IL-6 and IL-6sR levels were highest in those with presumed aggressive failure (P </=0.042). CONCLUSIONS Plasma IL-6 and IL-6sR levels were dramatically elevated in the men with prostate cancer metastatic to bone. In patients with clinically localized prostate cancer, the preoperative plasma IL-6 and IL-6sR levels independently predicted biochemical progression after surgery, presumably because of an association with occult metastatic disease present at the time of radical prostatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S F Shariat
- Baylor Prostate Center, Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine and Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Kim JH, Shariat SF, Kim IY, Menesses-Diaz A, Tokunaga H, Wheeler TM, Lerner SP. Predictive value of expression of transforming growth factor-beta(1) and its receptors in transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Cancer 2001; 92:1475-83. [PMID: 11745225 DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(20010915)92:6<1475::aid-cncr1472>3.0.co;2-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The purpose of this study was to describe the expression patterns of transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta(1) and its receptors in transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the bladder, to investigate the relation between the TGF-beta(1) and its receptors, and to determine whether altered expression of TGF-beta or its receptors is associated with disease progression and survival in patients with TCC of the bladder. METHODS Immunohistochemical staining for TGF-beta(1) and its receptors I and II was conducted on formalin fixed paraffin embedded archival cystectomy specimens of 80 patients with bladder TCC. Immunoreactivity was categorized as either positive or negative in a blinded fashion. RESULTS Expression of TGF-beta(1), TGF-beta-RI, and TGF-beta-RII was altered in 51 (64%), 34 (43%), and 38 (48%) specimens, respectively. Sixty (75%) specimens had altered expression of at least 1 of the 3 TGF-betas, and 26 (33%) had altered expression of all 3. Expression of the three TGF-betas was highly concordant (P < 0.018). Loss of expression of TGF-beta-RI or TGF-beta-RII was associated with invasive tumor stage (P < 0.001), high grade (P < 0.006), and lymphovascular invasion (P < 0.030). Overexpression of TGF-beta(1) was associated with invasive tumor stage only (P = 0.024). With a median follow-up of 101 months, TGF-beta-RI was an independent predictor of both disease progression (P = 0.007) and disease specific survival (P = 0.006) whereas TGF-beta(1) was an independent predictor of disease progression only (P = 0.050). Transforming growth factor-beta-RII was not independently associated with either disease progression or survival. CONCLUSIONS Altered expression of TGF-beta(1) and its receptors is common in TCC of the bladder. Overexpression of TGF-beta(1) is associated with the loss of expression of its receptors. Transforming growth factor-beta(1) and TGF-beta-RI are independently associated with clinical outcome in patients with bladder TCC treated by radical cystectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J H Kim
- Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine and the Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Tokunaga H, Shariat SF, Green AE, Brown RM, Zhou JH, Benedict WF, Lerner SP. Correlation of immunohistochemical molecular staging of bladder biopsies and radical cystectomy specimens. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 51:16-22. [PMID: 11516846 DOI: 10.1016/s0360-3016(01)01586-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine the relationship of p53, retinoblastoma (RB), and p16 expression between precystectomy transurethral resection bladder (TURB) biopsy and matched cystectomy specimens; and to determine the value of p53 immunoreactivity for predicting progression and survival in patients undergoing radical cystectomy. METHODS AND MATERIALS We performed p53 immunohistochemical staining on matched archival TURB and cystectomy specimens taken from 40 patients. Twenty-seven and 26 of these patients were also evaluated for RB and p16 expression, respectively. RESULTS Twenty-eight (70%) of the TURB and 22 (55%) of the cystectomy specimens stained positive for p53. RB and p16 protein expression were altered in 19 (70%) and 19 (73%) of the TURB specimens, respectively, and 19 (70%) and 19 (73%) of the cystectomy specimens, respectively. There was a strong correlation between p53, RB, and p16 expression and TURB and cystectomy specimens (all p < 0.001). In preoperative and postoperative multivariate analyses, biopsy p53 and cystectomy p53 were independently associated with disease progression (p = 0.049 and p = 0.034, respectively) and bladder cancer-related death (p = 0.044 and p = 0.037, respectively). CONCLUSION p53, RB, and p16 expression patterns on TURB specimens correlate with cystectomy specimens. p53 immunoreactivity is an independent predictor of disease progression and bladder cancer survival. These data support the potential of prognostic staging using immunohistochemical analysis on bladder biopsy specimens prior to neoadjuvant or definitive therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Tokunaga
- Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine and the Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Shariat SF, Shalev M, Menesses-Diaz A, Kim IY, Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM. Preoperative plasma levels of transforming growth factor beta(1) (TGF-beta(1)) strongly predict progression in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19:2856-64. [PMID: 11387358 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2001.19.11.2856] [Citation(s) in RCA: 168] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Elevated local and circulating levels of transforming growth factor beta(1) (TGF-beta(1)) have been associated with prostate cancer invasion and metastasis. We tested the hypothesis that preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) levels would independently predict cancer stage and prognosis in patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS The study group consisted of 120 consecutive patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer (median follow-up, 53.8 months). Preoperative plasma levels of TGF-beta(1) were measured and correlated with pathologic parameters and clinical outcomes. TGF-beta(1) levels also were measured in 44 healthy men without cancer, in 19 men with prostate cancer metastatic to regional lymph nodes, and in 10 men with prostate cancer metastatic to bone. RESULTS Plasma TGF-beta(1) levels in patients with lymph node metastases (14.2 +/- 2.6 ng/mL) and bone metastases (15.5 +/- 2.4 ng/mL) were higher than those in radical prostatectomy patients (5.2 +/- 1.3 ng/mL) and healthy subjects (4.5 +/- 1.2 ng/mL) (P <.001). In a preoperative analysis, preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) level and biopsy Gleason sum both were predictors of organ-confined disease (P =.006 and P =.006, respectively) and PSA progression (P <.001 and P =.021, respectively). In a postoperative multivariate analysis, preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) level, pathologic Gleason sum, and surgical margin status were predictors of PSA progression (P =.020,P =.020, and P =.022, respectively). In patients who progressed, preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) levels were higher in those with presumed distant compared with local-only failure (P =.019). CONCLUSION Plasma TGF-beta(1) levels are markedly elevated in men with prostate cancer metastatic to regional lymph nodes and bone. In men without clinical or pathologic evidence of metastases, the preoperative plasma TGF-beta(1) level is a strong predictor of biochemical progression after surgery, presumably because of an association with occult metastatic disease present at the time of radical prostatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S F Shariat
- Matsunaga-Conte Prostate Cancer Research Center, Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, and The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Byrne RR, Shariat SF, Brown R, Kattan MW, Morton RA JR, Wheeler TM, Lerner SP. E-cadherin immunostaining of bladder transitional cell carcinoma, carcinoma in situ and lymph node metastases with long-term followup. J Urol 2001; 165:1473-9. [PMID: 11342899] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE We analyze the expression of E-cadherin in bladder transitional cell carcinoma, areas of carcinoma in situ and lymph node metastases, and determine the value of E-cadherin immunoreactivity for predicting disease progression and survival of patients with bladder transitional cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study group consisted of 77 patients who underwent radical cystectomy. Formalin fixed paraffin sections were processed with a hot, citric acid antigen retrieval method, followed by immunostaining with anti-E-cadherin monoclonal antibody and a standard avidin biotin complex technique. E-cadherin expression was also evaluated in carcinoma in situ sections (18) and in regional lymph node metastases (17). RESULTS Loss of normal membrane E-cadherin immunoreactivity was found in 59 (77%) patients. Abnormal expression of E-cadherin was associated with muscle invasive disease (p = 0.010) and lymph node metastasis (p = 0.044). Of the 18 carcinoma in situ specimens 15 (83%) and of the 17 metastatic lymph nodes 13 (76%) had abnormal E-cadherin expression. Concordance rates of E-cadherin status in carcinoma in situ areas and metastatic lymph nodes with the primary tumors were 85% and 88%, respectively. At a median followup of 128 months, abnormal E-cadherin expression was significantly associated with disease progression (p = 0.0219) and bladder cancer specific survival (p = 0.037). E-cadherin expression and pathological stage but not grade were independent predictors of disease progression (p = 0.042, 0.047 and 0.158, respectively). CONCLUSIONS In bladder cancer altered E-cadherin expression is associated with the degree of invasiveness, lymph node metastasis and increased risk of death from bladder cancer. Furthermore, E-cadherin status is an independent predictor of disease progression in patients treated with cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R R Byrne
- Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, and The Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Gore JL, Shariat SF, Miles BJ, Kadmon D, Jiang N, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM. Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 2001; 165:1554-9. [PMID: 11342916] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The standard sextant protocol for obtaining transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate has been shown to underestimate the presence of prostate cancer. Studies have demonstrated an increased cancer detection rate with additional laterally directed biopsies. We compared the sensitivity of individual biopsy cores and evaluated combinations of these cores to identify an optimal biopsy strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 396 consecutive patients underwent biopsy of the lateral peripheral zone in addition to standard sextant biopsy. The cancer detection rate for each biopsy core was calculated. The sensitivity of different combinations of biopsy cores was compared with those of standard sextant biopsies and with a 12 core biopsy protocol that combined the standard sextant biopsy with a complete set of laterally directed cores. RESULTS Cancer was detected in 160 of 396 (40.3%) patients. Of the possible combinations of biopsy cores a strategy that included laterally directed cores at the base, mid gland and apex of the prostate with mid lobar base and apical cores detected 98.5% of cancers. The detection rate of this 10 core biopsy regimen was significantly better than that of the standard sextant protocol (p < or =0.001), and was equivalent to that of the 12 core regional biopsy (p > or =0.302). CONCLUSIONS The standard sextant protocol failed to detect a large proportion of cancers located laterally in the peripheral zone. A 10 core biopsy regimen that combined laterally directed cores at the base, mid gland and apex of the prostate with mid lobar biopsy cores at the base and apex maximizes the sensitivity of transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J L Gore
- Matsunaga-Conte Prostate Cancer Research Center, the Scott Department of Urology and Department of Pathology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|