1
|
Baard J, Cormio L, Dasgupta R, Maruzzi D, Rais-Bahrami S, Serrano A, Geavlete B, Giannakopoulos S, de la Rosette J, Laguna P. Unveiling the challenges of UTUC biopsies and cytology: insights from a global real-world practice study. World J Urol 2024; 42:177. [PMID: 38507109 PMCID: PMC10954852 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04866-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 02/08/2024] [Indexed: 03/22/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Diagnostic ureteroscopy (dURS) is optional in the assessment of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and provides the possibility of obtaining histology. METHODS To evaluate endoscopic biopsy techniques and outcomes, we assessed data from patients from the CROES-UTUC registry. The registry includes multicenter prospective collected data on diagnosis and management of patients suspected having UTUC. RESULTS We assessed 2380 patients from 101 centers. dURS with biopsy was performed in 31.6% of patients. The quality of samples was sufficient for diagnosis in 83.5% of cases. There was no significant association between biopsy techniques and quality (p = 0.458). High-grade biopsy accurately predicted high-grade disease in 95.7% and high-risk stage disease in 86%. In ureteroscopic low-grade tumours, the prediction of subsequent low-grade disease was 66.9% and low-risk stage Ta-disease 35.8%. Ureteroscopic staging correctly predicted non-invasive Ta-disease and ≥ T1 disease in 48.9% and 47.9% of patients, respectively. Cytology outcomes did not provide additional value in predicting tumour grade. CONCLUSION Biopsy results adequately predict high-grade and high-risk disease, but approximately one-third of patients are under-staged. Two-thirds of patients with low-grade URS-biopsy have high-risk stage disease, highlighting the need for improved diagnostics to better assess patient risk and guide treatment decisions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02281188; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02281188 ).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joyce Baard
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Luigi Cormio
- Department of Urology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Ranan Dasgupta
- Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Daniele Maruzzi
- Department of Urology, S. Maria Degli Angeli Hospital, Pordenone, Italy
| | - Soroush Rais-Bahrami
- Departments of Urology and Radiology, O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at UAB, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Alvaro Serrano
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Stilianos Giannakopoulos
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Democritus University of Thrace, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Alexandroupolis, Greece
| | - Jean de la Rosette
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol Mega University Hospital, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Pilar Laguna
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol Mega University Hospital, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mori K, Hatakeyama S, Enokida H, Miyake H, Kikuchi E, Nishiyama H, Ichikawa T, Kamai T, Kaji Y, Kume H, Kondo T, Matsuyama H, Masumori N, Kawauchi A, Takenaka A, Uemura H, Eto M, Nonomura N, Fujii Y, Hinotsu S, Ohyama C. Summary of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma 2023 by the Japanese Urological Association. Int J Urol 2024; 31:194-207. [PMID: 38113344 DOI: 10.1111/iju.15362] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2023] [Accepted: 11/26/2023] [Indexed: 12/21/2023]
Abstract
This article is an English translation of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma (2nd edition) published in June 2023. The Japanese Urological Association's (JUA) Guidelines Committee on Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma (UTUC) created a 2023 update guideline to support clinicians' current evidence-based management of UTUC and to incorporate its recommendations into clinical practice. The new guideline adhered as closely as possible to the Minds Manual for Guideline Development 2020 ver. 3.0. Findings related to epidemiological, pathological, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up were reviewed. In addition, seven clinical questions (CQs) were set to determine the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. Preconceptions and biases were removed from the preparation process, the overall evidence was evaluated appropriately, and recommendations were made after fully considering the balance between benefits and harms. Although the evidence is still insufficient to be taken up as a CQ, the latest important information is described in seven columns, and clinical issues that should be resolved in the future related to the CQ are described as recommendations for tomorrow. We hope that these guidelines will help medical professionals, patients, and their families involved in the treatment of UTUC in their decision-making, and hope that a critical review of these guidelines will lead to further refinements in the next edition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kazuyuki Mori
- Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Aomori, Japan
| | - Shingo Hatakeyama
- Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Aomori, Japan
| | - Hideki Enokida
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Kagoshima, Japan
| | - Hideaki Miyake
- Department of Urology, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan
| | - Eiji Kikuchi
- Department of Urology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Hiroyuki Nishiyama
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
| | - Tomohiko Ichikawa
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Chiba, Japan
| | - Takao Kamai
- Department of Urology, Dokkyo Medical University, Mibu, Tochigi, Japan
| | - Yasushi Kaji
- Department of Radiology, Shimane University Faculty of Medicine, Izumo, Shimane, Japan
| | - Haruki Kume
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tsunenori Kondo
- Department of Urology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Adachi Medical Center, Adachi, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hideyasu Matsuyama
- Department of Urology, JA Yamaguchi Kouseiren Nagato General Hospital, Nagato, Yamaguchi, Japan
| | - Naoya Masumori
- Department of Urology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan
| | | | - Atsushi Takenaka
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Tottori, Japan
| | - Hirotsugu Uemura
- Department of Urology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan
| | - Masatoshi Eto
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Norio Nonomura
- Department of Urology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan
| | - Yasuhisa Fujii
- Department of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Bunkyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shiro Hinotsu
- Department of Biostatistics and Data Management, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan
| | - Chikara Ohyama
- Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Aomori, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Figaroa OJA, Hendriks N, Kamphuis GM, van Moorselaar RJA, Bins AD, Baard J. Positioning the role of urine cytology within the diagnostic pathway for UTUC: supportive but inconclusive. World J Urol 2023; 41:3429-3435. [PMID: 37987866 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04689-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2023] [Accepted: 10/10/2023] [Indexed: 11/22/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE With the introduction of kidney-sparing surgery (KSS) for low-risk Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma (UTUC), correct risk-stratification has become crucial. High-grade cytology is one of the decisive variables to stratify a tumor as high-risk. To position the role of urine cytology in the diagnostic pathway of UTUC patients, we evaluated the accuracy of urine cytology by comparing the outcomes with histopathology. METHOD Patients with UTUC evaluated between 2010 and 2020, and diagnosed by imaging, cytology and histopathology were selected. Descriptive statistics were used to compare cytology with histopathological outcomes using crosstabs. Clinical performance characteristics of cytology were determined for the presence of a malignancy. RESULTS This study included 176 patients with confirmed histopathological UTUC. Concordance between cytology and biopsy results was found in 14.8% of low-grade tumors and 16.8% of high-grade tumors. Comparing cytology with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) specimens revealed concordance rates of 1.6% for low-grade tumors and 22.9% for high-grade tumors. Notably, 51.1% of urine cytology results were false negative. Sensitivity for detecting high-grade and low-grade tumors with a positive urine cytology was 56.6% and 52.6%, respectively, with specificities of 54.8% and 37.2%. CONCLUSION In the current study, cytology appears to exhibit limited reliability when used as a sole diagnostic tool for assessing tumor grade and consequently risk stratification. It is imperative to recognize these limitations, optimize urine sampling techniques, and leverage a combination of diverse diagnostic methods for the most effective and individualized treatment decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Orlane J A Figaroa
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Immunology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Nora Hendriks
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Guido M Kamphuis
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R Jeroen A van Moorselaar
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Adriaan D Bins
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Immunology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joyce Baard
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Katayama S, Pradere B, Grossman NC, Potretzke AM, Boorjian SA, Ghoreifi A, Daneshmand S, Djaladat H, Sfakianos JP, Mari A, Khene ZE, D'Andrea D, Hayakawa N, Breda A, Fontana M, Fujita K, Antonelli A, van Doeveren T, Steinbach C, Mori K, Laukhtina E, Rouprêt M, Margulis V, Karakiewicz PI, Araki M, Compérat E, Nasu Y, Shariat SF. Biological and prognostic implications of biopsy upgrading for high-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma at nephroureterectomy. Int J Urol 2023; 30:63-69. [PMID: 36349904 PMCID: PMC10098861 DOI: 10.1111/iju.15061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2022] [Accepted: 09/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Technical limitations of ureteroscopic (URS) biopsy has been considered responsible for substantial upgrading rate in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). However, the impact of tumor specific factors for upgrading remain uninvestigated. METHODS Patients who underwent URS biopsy were included between 2005 and 2020 at 13 institutions. We assessed the prognostic impact of upgrading (low-grade on URS biopsy) versus same grade (high-grade on URS biopsy) for high-grade UTUC tumors on radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) specimens. RESULTS This study included 371 patients, of whom 112 (30%) and 259 (70%) were biopsy-based low- and high-grade tumors, respectively. Median follow-up was 27.3 months. Patients with high-grade biopsy were more likely to harbor unfavorable pathologic features, such as lymphovascular invasion (p < 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (LNs; p < 0.001). On multivariable analyses adjusting for the established risk factors, high-grade biopsy was significantly associated with worse overall (hazard ratio [HR] 1.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.75; p = 0.018), cancer-specific (HR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.07-3.52; p = 0.03), and recurrence-free survival (HR 1.80; 95% CI, 1.13-2.87; p = 0.013). In subgroup analyses of patients with pT2-T4 and/or positive LN, its significant association retained. Furthermore, high-grade biopsy in clinically non-muscle invasive disease significantly predicted upstaging to final pathologically advanced disease (≥pT2) compared to low-grade biopsy. CONCLUSIONS High tumor grade on URS biopsy is associated with features of biologically and clinically aggressive UTUC tumors. URS low-grade UTUC that becomes upgraded to high-grade might carry a better prognosis than high-grade UTUC on URS. Tumor specific factors are likely to be responsible for upgrading to high-grade on RNU.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Satoshi Katayama
- 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
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Nico C Grossman
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Alireza Ghoreifi
- Department of Urology, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Sia Daneshmand
- Department of Urology, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Hooman Djaladat
- Department of Urology, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - John P Sfakianos
- Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Andrea Mari
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Zine-Eddine Khene
- Department of Urology, Hospital Pontchaillou, CHU Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - David D'Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Nozomi Hayakawa
- Department of Urology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Alberto Breda
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Matteo Fontana
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Kazutoshi Fujita
- Department of Urology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
| | - Alessandro Antonelli
- Urology Unit AUOI Verona, Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Pediatrics and Gynecology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Thomas van Doeveren
- Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Christina Steinbach
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Morgan Rouprêt
- GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Urology, Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Vitaly Margulis
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Motoo Araki
- Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Eva Compérat
- GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Urology, Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.,Department of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Yasutomo Nasu
- Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.,Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.,Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan.,Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York City, New York, USA.,Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.,Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gust KM, Resch I, D'Andrea D, Shariat SF. Update on systemic treatment of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a narrative review of the literature. Transl Androl Urol 2021; 10:4051-4061. [PMID: 34804847 PMCID: PMC8575594 DOI: 10.21037/tau-21-47] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2021] [Accepted: 08/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Urothelial cancer (UC) is most commonly found in the urinary bladder, but can also appear in the upper urinary tract, where it is associated with several disease-specific challenges affecting its diagnosis, clinical staging, surgical management, and systemic therapy. A significant number of patients experience extra-vesical disease recurrence despite radical nephroureterectomy (RNU), leading to inevitable demise. Over the last years, the therapeutic armamentarium of UC has expanded with several systemic treatment options entering clinical care and deliver the potential to support a more individualized treatment in the near future. Currently, novel targeted therapies are emerging, accompanied with extensive biomarker research, which leads to a better understanding of the disease and therefore, reshaping the treatment landscape continuously and decisively. Though, systemic treatment of UTUC comes along with certain challenges that are specific to the disease, e.g., loss of renal function after RNU, which might result in ineligibility for a cisplatin-based chemotherapy. In this narrative review, the current standard of systemic treatment of UC in the perioperative and metastatic treatment setting are reported, with focus on UTUC. In addition, molecular aspects of UTUC, as well as future directions and specific implications for treatment of patients diagnosed with UTUC are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kilian M Gust
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Irene Resch
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - David D'Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Shahrokh 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, Prague, Czech Republic.,Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.,Department of Special Surgery, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Baard J, Cormio L, Cavadas V, Alcaraz A, Shariat SF, de la Rosette J, Laguna MP. Contemporary patterns of presentation, diagnostics and management of upper tract urothelial cancer in 101 centres: the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Global upper tract urothelial carcinoma registry. Curr Opin Urol 2021; 31:354-362. [PMID: 34009177 DOI: 10.1097/mou.0000000000000899] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW To assess patterns of presentation, diagnostics and treatment in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), a multicentre registry was launched. Clinical data of UTUC patients were prospectively collected over a 5-year period. RECENT FINDINGS Data from 2380 patients were included from 2014 to 2019 (101 centres in 29 countries). Patients were predominantly male (70.5%) and 53.3% were past or present smokers. The majority of patients (58.1%) were evaluated because of symptoms, mainly macroscopic hematuria. Computed tomography (CT) was the most common performed imaging modality (90.5%). A ureteroscopy (URS) was part of the diagnostic process in 1184 (49.7%) patients and 488 (20.5%) patients were treated endoscopically. In total, 1430 patients (60.1%) were treated by a radical nephroureterectomy, 59% without a prior diagnostic URS. Eighty-two patients (3.4%) underwent a segmental resection, 19 patients (0.8%) were treated by a percutaneous tumour resection. SUMMARY Our data is in line with the known epidemiologic characteristics of UTUC. CT imaging is the preferred imaging modality as also recommended by guidelines. Diagnostic URS gained a stronger position, however, in almost half of patients a definitive treatment decision was made without complete endoscopic information. Only one-third of patients with UTUC are currently treated with kidney sparing surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joyce Baard
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Luigi Cormio
- Department of Urology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Vitor Cavadas
- Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Antonio Alcaraz
- Department of Urology Hospital Clinic i Provincial de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, UT Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA
- Department of Urology, Motol Hospital Charles University, Praque, Czech Republic
- Department of Urology, I.M. Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Jean de la Rosette
- Department of Urology, Medipol Mega University Hospital, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Maria P Laguna
- Department of Urology, Medipol Mega University Hospital, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
van Doeveren T, van der Mark M, van Leeuwen PJ, Boormans JL, Aben KKH. Rising incidence rates and unaltered survival rates for primary upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a Dutch population-based study from 1993 to 2017. BJU Int 2021; 128:343-351. [PMID: 33690922 PMCID: PMC8453942 DOI: 10.1111/bju.15389] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Aim To assess trends in the incidence, disease management and survival rates for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) in the Netherlands. Materials and methods Patients diagnosed with primary UTUC in the Netherlands between 1993 and 2017 were identified through the population‐based Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Patient and tumour characteristics, as well as information on treatment and vital status, were retrieved from the NCR. Age‐standardized incidence rates were calculated, stratified by age, gender, calendar period and disease stage. Relative survival served as an approximation for cancer‐specific survival. Results We identified 13 314 patients with primary UTUC. The age‐standardized incidence rate increased from 2.0 in 1993 to 3.2 per 100 000 person‐years in 2017, without change in gender distribution. The increase in incidence held for all disease stages except organ‐confined (T1–T2) disease. The most prominent increase was in superficial (Tis/Ta) and metastatic (M+) UTUC, which increased from 0.6 to 1.2 and 0.1 to 0.4 per 100 000 person‐years, respectively. The 5‐year relative survival did not change over time: 57.0% (95% confidence interval 55.9–58.1). Applied treatments were largely the same over the study period, although fewer radical nephroureterectomies and more kidney‐sparing surgeries were performed in the most recent years. The use of peri‐operative intravesical chemotherapy modestly increased. Conclusion Between 1993 and 2017, the age‐standardized incidence of primary UTUC in the Netherlands has increased by more than 50%, but the relative survival of UTUC patients remained unchanged. Preventive measures against exposure to risk factors, early detection of disease, and more efficacious treatment methods are needed to improve outcomes of patients with UTUC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas van Doeveren
- Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marianne van der Mark
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Pim J van Leeuwen
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost L Boormans
- Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Katja K H Aben
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|