Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Adjuvant chemotherapy improves overall survival in patients with localized upper tract urothelial carcinoma harboring pathologic vascular invasion: a propensity score-matched analysis of multi-institutional cohort

  • Original Article
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Whether adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) offers survival benefit is still controversial. To explore the impact of AC on overall survival (OS) of cN0M0 UTUC patients, we conducted a propensity score-matched analysis using the regression model, including pathologic features such as lymphatic and vascular invasion.

Methods

A multi-institutional cohort of 413 UTUC patient record was used. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce bias by potential confounding factors for survival, including pathologic features from the specimen of radical nephroureterectomy (RNU),

Results

Ninety-eight patients were identified as pair-matched groups (49 patients in RNU and 49 patients in RNU + AC). Kaplan–Meier curves demonstrated that a 5-year OS rate of 72.7% for patients treated with RNU + AC was significantly higher than 51.6% for those treated with RNU (p = 0.0156). On multivariate analysis, pathologic vascular invasion (HR 3.41, 95% CI 1.24–10.66, p = 0.0166) and administration of AC (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.19–0.98, p = 0.0438) still remained as the significant predictors for OS. In patients with pathologic vascular invasion (51 of 98 patients), a significantly longer OS in RNU + AC groups was observed (median OS of 30 and 70 months in RNU and RNU + AC groups, respectively: p = 0.0432), whereas there was no significant difference in the OS between RNU (median OS: not reached) and RNU + AC (median OS: not reached) groups in patients without the invasion (p = 0.4549).

Conclusion

The result indicates a significant benefit for OS by the administration of AC, and pathologic vascular invasion in the specimen of RNU could help the patient selection to better predict the effect of AC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2018) Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 68(1):7–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Roupret M, Babjuk M, Comperat E et al (2018) European association of urology guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: 2017 update. Eur Urol 73(1):111–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim TS, Oh JH, Rhew HY (2013) The efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced upper tract urothelial cell carcinoma. J Cancer 4(8):686–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fujita K, Taneishi K, Inamoto T et al (2017) Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival of patients with high-risk upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis. BMC Urol 17(1):110

  5. Nakagawa T, Komemushi Y, Kawai T et al (2017) Efficacy of post-nephroureterectomy cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a multi-institutional retrospective study. World J Urol 35(10):1569–1575

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fujita K, Inamoto T, Yamamoto Y et al (2015) Role of adjuvant chemotherapy for lymph node-positive upper tract urothelial carcinoma and the prognostic significance of C-reactive protein: a multi-institutional, retrospective study. Int J Urol 22(11):1006–1012

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gin GE, Ruel NH, Kardos SV et al (2017) Utilization of perioperative systemic chemotherapy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Urol Oncol 35(5):192–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hellenthal NJ, Shariat SF, Margulis V et al (2009) Adjuvant chemotherapy for high risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma: results from the Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Collaboration. J Urol 182(3):900–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kwak C, Lee SE, Jeong IG, Ku JH (2006) Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with invasive transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract. Urology 68(1):53–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Yang X, Li P, Deng X et al (2017) Perioperative treatments for resected upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a network meta-analysis. Oncotarget 8(2):3568–3580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Seisen T, Krasnow RE, Bellmunt J et al (2017) Effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy after radical nephroureterectomy for locally advanced and/or positive regional lymph node upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 35(8):852–860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Necchi A, Lo Vullo S, Mariani L et al (2018) Adjuvant chemotherapy after radical nephroureterectomy does not improve survival in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a joint study by the European Association of Urology-Young Academic Urologists and the Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Collaboration. BJU Int 121(2):252–259

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Song SH, Ye CH, Lee S et al (2019) Association between lymphovascular invasion and oncologic outcomes among upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 145(11):2863–2870

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Novara G, Matsumoto K, Kassouf W et al (2010) Prognostic role of lymphovascular invasion in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract: an international validation study. Eur Urol 57(6):1064–1071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kikuchi E, Margulis V, Karakiewicz PI et al (2009) Lymphovascular invasion predicts clinical outcomes in patients with node-negative upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 27(4):612–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Birtle AJ, Chester JD, Jones RJ et al (2018) Results of POUT: A phase III randomised trial of perioperative chemotherapy versus surveillance in upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC). J Clin Oncol 36(6_suppl):407–407

  17. World Medical A (2013) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 310(20):2191–2194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Inamoto T, Matsuyama H, Ibuki N et al (2018) Risk stratification by means of biological age-related factors better predicts cancer-specific survival than chronological age in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a multi-institutional database study. Ther Adv Urol 10(12):403–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Huang CC, Su YL, Luo HL et al (2019) Gender is a significant prognostic factor for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a large hospital-based cancer registry study in an endemic area. Front Oncol 9:157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Inamoto T, Komura K, Watsuji T, Azuma H (2012) Specific body mass index cut-off value in relation to survival of patients with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinomas. Int J Clin Oncol 17(3):256–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yeh HC, Jan HC, Wu WJ et al (2015) Concurrent preoperative presence of hydronephrosis and flank pain independently predicts worse outcome of upper tract urothelial carcinoma. PLoS ONE 10(10):e0139624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Inamoto T, Matsuyama H, Ibuki N et al (2018) Biological behavior and long-term outcomes of carcinoma in situ in upper urinary tract managed by radical nephroureterectomy. J Urol 199(4):933–939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Holmang S, Lele SM, Johansson SL (2007) Squamous cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis and ureter: incidence, symptoms, treatment and outcome. J Urol 178(1):51–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Matin SF, Margulis V, Kamat A et al (2010) Incidence of downstaging and complete remission after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk upper tract transitional cell carcinoma. Cancer 116(13):3127–3134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Porten S, Siefker-Radtke AO, Xiao L et al (2014) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Cancer 120(12):1794–1799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kaag MG, O'Malley RL, O'Malley P et al (2010) Changes in renal function following nephroureterectomy may affect the use of perioperative chemotherapy. Eur Urol 58(4):581–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim DK, Kim JW, Jung HD, Ahn HK, Lee JY, Cho KS (2019) Effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on locally advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer

  28. Kondo T, Tanabe K (2012) Role of lymphadenectomy in the management of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and the upper urinary tract. Int J Urol 19(8):710–721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Seisen T, Shariat SF, Cussenot O et al (2017) Contemporary role of lymph node dissection at the time of radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. World J Urol 35(4):535–548

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the Foundation of Research Basis Development in Osaka Medical College (Japan), Grant-in-Aid No. 19K18624 (Japan Society for the Promotion of Science: JSPS), The Uehara Memorial Foundation, The NOVARTIS Foundation (Japan) for the Promotion of Science, Japan Research Foundation for Clinical Pharmacology, Yamaguchi Endocrine Disease Research Foundation, and Takeda Science Foundation 2018 in Japan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Osaka Medical College, 2-7 Daigaku-machi, Takatsuki, Osaka, 569-8686, Japan

    Tomohisa Matsunaga, Kazumasa Komura, Takeshi Tsutsumi, Takuya Tsujino, Yuki Yoshikawa, Tomoaki Takai, Koichiro Minami, Hirofumi Uehara, Hajime Hirano, Hayahito Nomi, Naokazu Ibuki, Teruo Inamoto & Haruhito Azuma

  2. Department of Urology, Tokyo Medical University, 6-7-1 Nishi-shinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-0023, Japan

    Takeshi Hashimoto, Ryu Muraoka, Naoya Satake & Yoshio Ohno

  3. Translational Research Program, Osaka Medical College, 2-7 Daigaku-machi, Takatsuki, Osaka, 569-8686, Japan

    Kazumasa Komura, Kohei Taniguchi & Tomohito Tanaka

  4. Department of Urology, Fujita-Health University School of Medicine, 1-98 Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan

    Kiyoshi Takahara

  5. Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA

    Kazumasa Komura

  6. Translational Research Program, Osaka Medical College, Osaka, Japan

    Kazumasa Komura

Authors
  1. Tomohisa Matsunaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kazumasa Komura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Takeshi Hashimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ryu Muraoka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Naoya Satake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Takeshi Tsutsumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Takuya Tsujino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yuki Yoshikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Tomoaki Takai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Koichiro Minami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Kohei Taniguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Tomohito Tanaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Hirofumi Uehara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Hajime Hirano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Hayahito Nomi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Naokazu Ibuki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Kiyoshi Takahara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Teruo Inamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Yoshio Ohno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Haruhito Azuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazumasa Komura.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no conflict of interest exists.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matsunaga, T., Komura, K., Hashimoto, T. et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy improves overall survival in patients with localized upper tract urothelial carcinoma harboring pathologic vascular invasion: a propensity score-matched analysis of multi-institutional cohort. World J Urol 38, 3183–3190 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03118-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03118-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation