膀胱尿路上皮癌三联疗法与放疗的存活率

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Mario de Angelis, Carolin Siech, Francesco Di Bello, Natali Rodriguez Peñaranda, Jordan A Goyal, Zhe Tian, Nicola Longo, Felix K H Chun, Stefano Puliatti, Fred Saad, Shahrokh F Shariat, Giorgio Gandaglia, Marco Moschini, Armando Stabile, Francesco Montorsi, Alberto Briganti, Pierre I Karakiewicz
{"title":"膀胱尿路上皮癌三联疗法与放疗的存活率","authors":"Mario de Angelis, Carolin Siech, Francesco Di Bello, Natali Rodriguez Peñaranda, Jordan A Goyal, Zhe Tian, Nicola Longo, Felix K H Chun, Stefano Puliatti, Fred Saad, Shahrokh F Shariat, Giorgio Gandaglia, Marco Moschini, Armando Stabile, Francesco Montorsi, Alberto Briganti, Pierre I Karakiewicz","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2024.09.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Trimodal therapy (TMT) provided significant survival advantage relative to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) alone in prospective trials. However, the magnitude of survival benefit has not been validated in population-based studies. The objective of this study is to determine whether TMT is associated with lower cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rates relative to EBRT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2020), we identified patients with cT2-T4aN0M0 urothelial carcinoma of urinary bladder (UCUB) treated with either TMT or EBRT. Cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing risk regression (CRR) models addressed CSM after additional adjustment for other-cause mortality and standard covariates. The same methodology was repeated according to stage and age categories.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Of 4471 patients, 3391 (76%) underwent TMT versus 1080 (24%) EBRT. TMT rates increased over time in the overall cohort (estimated annual percent change [EAPC]: 1.8%, p < 0.001) as well as in organ-confined (OC) stage (EAPC: 1.7%, p < 0.001), but not in non-organ-confined (NOC) stage (p = 0.051). In the overall cohort, 5-yr CSM rates were 43.6% in TMT versus 52.7% in EBRT. In multivariable CRR models, TMT was an independent predictor of lower CSM (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76, p < 0.001). In OC patients, 5-yr CSM rates were 42.0% in TMT versus 51.9% in EBRT (p < 0.001). In multivariable CRR models, TMT was an independent predictor of lower CSM (HR: 0.74, p < 0.001). Conversely, in NOC patients, TMT did not achieve independent predictor status (p = 0.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>In this population-based study, relative to EBRT, TMT is associated with lower CSM in OC stage, but not in NOC UCUB patients.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>In this report, we investigated the survival benefit of administering systemic chemotherapy in addition to radiotherapy in patients who are candidates for bladder-sparing strategies. We found that the combination of systemic chemotherapy and radiotherapy leads to improved cancer-specific survival compared with radiotherapy alone in patients with organ-confined urothelial carcinoma. We conclude that among patients who are candidates for bladder-sparing strategies, following transurethral resection, the combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy (namely, trimodal therapy) should always be offered in those with organ-confined urothelial carcinoma.</p>","PeriodicalId":12160,"journal":{"name":"European urology focus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival Rates in Trimodal Therapy Versus Radiotherapy in Urothelial Carcinoma of Urinary Bladder.\",\"authors\":\"Mario de Angelis, Carolin Siech, Francesco Di Bello, Natali Rodriguez Peñaranda, Jordan A Goyal, Zhe Tian, Nicola Longo, Felix K H Chun, Stefano Puliatti, Fred Saad, Shahrokh F Shariat, Giorgio Gandaglia, Marco Moschini, Armando Stabile, Francesco Montorsi, Alberto Briganti, Pierre I Karakiewicz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.euf.2024.09.013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Trimodal therapy (TMT) provided significant survival advantage relative to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) alone in prospective trials. However, the magnitude of survival benefit has not been validated in population-based studies. The objective of this study is to determine whether TMT is associated with lower cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rates relative to EBRT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2020), we identified patients with cT2-T4aN0M0 urothelial carcinoma of urinary bladder (UCUB) treated with either TMT or EBRT. Cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing risk regression (CRR) models addressed CSM after additional adjustment for other-cause mortality and standard covariates. The same methodology was repeated according to stage and age categories.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Of 4471 patients, 3391 (76%) underwent TMT versus 1080 (24%) EBRT. TMT rates increased over time in the overall cohort (estimated annual percent change [EAPC]: 1.8%, p < 0.001) as well as in organ-confined (OC) stage (EAPC: 1.7%, p < 0.001), but not in non-organ-confined (NOC) stage (p = 0.051). In the overall cohort, 5-yr CSM rates were 43.6% in TMT versus 52.7% in EBRT. In multivariable CRR models, TMT was an independent predictor of lower CSM (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76, p < 0.001). In OC patients, 5-yr CSM rates were 42.0% in TMT versus 51.9% in EBRT (p < 0.001). In multivariable CRR models, TMT was an independent predictor of lower CSM (HR: 0.74, p < 0.001). Conversely, in NOC patients, TMT did not achieve independent predictor status (p = 0.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>In this population-based study, relative to EBRT, TMT is associated with lower CSM in OC stage, but not in NOC UCUB patients.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>In this report, we investigated the survival benefit of administering systemic chemotherapy in addition to radiotherapy in patients who are candidates for bladder-sparing strategies. We found that the combination of systemic chemotherapy and radiotherapy leads to improved cancer-specific survival compared with radiotherapy alone in patients with organ-confined urothelial carcinoma. We conclude that among patients who are candidates for bladder-sparing strategies, following transurethral resection, the combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy (namely, trimodal therapy) should always be offered in those with organ-confined urothelial carcinoma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology focus\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology focus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.09.013\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.09.013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:在前瞻性试验中,三联疗法(TMT)相对于单纯外照射疗法(EBRT)具有显著的生存优势。然而,生存获益的程度尚未在基于人群的研究中得到验证。本研究的目的是确定相对于 EBRT,TMT 是否与较低的癌症特异性死亡率(CSM)相关:在监测、流行病学和最终结果数据库(2004-2020 年)中,我们确定了接受 TMT 或 EBRT 治疗的 cT2-T4aN0M0 尿路膀胱上皮癌(UCUB)患者。在对其他原因死亡率和标准协变量进行额外调整后,累积发病率图和多变量竞争风险回归(CRR)模型解决了CSM问题。根据分期和年龄类别重复相同的方法:在 4471 例患者中,3391 例(76%)接受了 TMT 治疗,1080 例(24%)接受了 EBRT 治疗。随着时间的推移,总体队列中的TMT率有所上升(估计年百分比变化[EAPC]:1.8%,P<0.05):结论和临床意义:在这项以人群为基础的研究中,相对于 EBRT,TMT 与 OC 期较低的 CSM 相关,但与 NOC UCUB 患者的 CSM 无关。我们发现,在器官封闭性尿路上皮癌患者中,与单纯放疗相比,全身化疗和放疗联合使用可提高癌症特异性生存率。我们的结论是,在经尿道切除术后,对于适合采用保膀胱策略的患者,应始终为器官封闭性尿路上皮癌患者提供放化疗联合治疗(即三联疗法)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survival Rates in Trimodal Therapy Versus Radiotherapy in Urothelial Carcinoma of Urinary Bladder.

Background and objective: Trimodal therapy (TMT) provided significant survival advantage relative to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) alone in prospective trials. However, the magnitude of survival benefit has not been validated in population-based studies. The objective of this study is to determine whether TMT is associated with lower cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rates relative to EBRT.

Methods: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2020), we identified patients with cT2-T4aN0M0 urothelial carcinoma of urinary bladder (UCUB) treated with either TMT or EBRT. Cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing risk regression (CRR) models addressed CSM after additional adjustment for other-cause mortality and standard covariates. The same methodology was repeated according to stage and age categories.

Key findings and limitations: Of 4471 patients, 3391 (76%) underwent TMT versus 1080 (24%) EBRT. TMT rates increased over time in the overall cohort (estimated annual percent change [EAPC]: 1.8%, p < 0.001) as well as in organ-confined (OC) stage (EAPC: 1.7%, p < 0.001), but not in non-organ-confined (NOC) stage (p = 0.051). In the overall cohort, 5-yr CSM rates were 43.6% in TMT versus 52.7% in EBRT. In multivariable CRR models, TMT was an independent predictor of lower CSM (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76, p < 0.001). In OC patients, 5-yr CSM rates were 42.0% in TMT versus 51.9% in EBRT (p < 0.001). In multivariable CRR models, TMT was an independent predictor of lower CSM (HR: 0.74, p < 0.001). Conversely, in NOC patients, TMT did not achieve independent predictor status (p = 0.3).

Conclusions and clinical implications: In this population-based study, relative to EBRT, TMT is associated with lower CSM in OC stage, but not in NOC UCUB patients.

Patient summary: In this report, we investigated the survival benefit of administering systemic chemotherapy in addition to radiotherapy in patients who are candidates for bladder-sparing strategies. We found that the combination of systemic chemotherapy and radiotherapy leads to improved cancer-specific survival compared with radiotherapy alone in patients with organ-confined urothelial carcinoma. We conclude that among patients who are candidates for bladder-sparing strategies, following transurethral resection, the combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy (namely, trimodal therapy) should always be offered in those with organ-confined urothelial carcinoma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European urology focus
European urology focus Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
274
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology Focus is a new sister journal to European Urology and an official publication of the European Association of Urology (EAU). EU Focus will publish original articles, opinion piece editorials and topical reviews on a wide range of urological issues such as oncology, functional urology, reconstructive urology, laparoscopy, robotic surgery, endourology, female urology, andrology, paediatric urology and sexual medicine. The editorial team welcome basic and translational research articles in the field of urological diseases. Authors may be solicited by the Editor directly. All submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by a panel of experts before being considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信