Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

TALL score for prediction of oncological outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy for high-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma

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

Abstract

Purpose

We created a prognostic tool for the prediction of oncologic outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for high-grade non-metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC).

Methods

UTUC collaboration was utilized to include 586 patients who underwent RNU for non-metastatic high-grade UTUC. Survival outcomes were compared according to a score defined based on the sum of the independent prognostic variables.

Results

The study included 382 males with a median age 70 years (range 28–97). Independent prognostic factors included: T (t stage), A (architecture), LVI (lympho-vascular invasion) and L (lymphadenectomy). TALL score (1–7) was the sum of T (≤T1 = 1, T2 = 2, T3 = 3 and T4 = 4), A (papillary = 0 and sessile = 1), LVI (absent = 0 and present = 1) and L (lymphadenectomy = 0 and no lymphadenectomy = 1). Five-year disease-free survival (DFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were stratified into four risk categories according to the TALL score: low (TALL 0–2; 86 % DFS and 90 % CSS), intermediate (TALL = 3; 71 % DFS and 75 % CSS), high (TALL = 4; 57 % DFS and 58 % CSS) and very high risk (TALL ≥ 5; 34 % DFS and 38 % CSS) using Kaplan–Meier survival analyses. TALL score was externally validated in a single-center cohort of 85 UTUC patients.

Conclusions

We developed a multivariable prognostic tool for the prediction of oncological outcomes after RNU for high-grade UTUC. The score can be used for patient counseling, selection for adjuvant systemic therapies and design of clinical trials.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

RNU:

Radical nephroureterectomy

UTUC:

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma

TALL:

T (t stage), A (architecture), LVI (lympho-vascular invasion) and L (lymphadenectomy)

DFS:

Disease-free survival

CSS:

Cancer-specific survival

AJCC/UICC:

American Joint Cancer Committee/Union Internationale Contre le Cancer

WHO/ISUP:

World Health Organization/International Society of Urologic Pathology

LN:

Lymph nodes

CIS:

Carcinoma in situ

ROC:

Receiver operating characteristic

HR:

Hazard ratio

CI:

Confidence interval

UCB:

Urothelial carcinoma of the bladder

N0:

Node negative

Nx:

Unknown nodal status

M0:

No metastasis

References

  1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A (2013) Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 63:11–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Xylinas E, Rink M, Margulis V, Clozel T, Lee RK et al (2013) Impact of renal function on eligibility for chemotherapy and survival in patients who have undergone radical nephro-ureterectomy. BJU Int 112(4):453–461

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Adibi M, Youssef R, Shariat SF, Lotan Y, Wood CG et al (2012) Oncological outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: comparison over the three decades. Int J Urol 19:1060–1066

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Margulis V, Shariat SF, Matin SF, Kamat AM, Zigeuner R et al (2009) Outcomes of radical nephroureterectomy: a series from the Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Collaboration. Cancer 115:1224–1233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Youssef RF, Lotan Y, Sagalowsky AI, Shariat SF, Wood CG et al (2013) Radical nephroureterectomy for pathologic T4 upper tract urothelial cancer: can oncologic outcomes be improved with multimodality therapy? Int Braz J Urol 39:614–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Youssef RF, Shariat SF, Lotan Y, Wood CG, Sagalowsky AI et al (2011) Upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma with loco-regional nodal metastases: insights from the Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Collaboration. BJU Int 108(8):1286–1291

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Grossman HB, Natale RB, Tangen CM, Speights VO, Vogelzang NJ et al (2003) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus cystectomy compared with cystectomy alone for locally advanced bladder cancer. N Engl J Med 349:859–866

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fritsche HM, Novara G, Burger M, Gupta A, Matsumoto K et al (2010) Macroscopic sessile tumor architecture is a pathologic feature of biologically aggressive upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Urol Oncol

  11. Remzi M, Haitel A, Margulis V, Karakiewicz P, Montorsi F et al (2009) Tumour architecture is an independent predictor of outcomes after nephroureterectomy: a multi-institutional analysis of 1363 patients. BJU Int 103:307–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Margulis V, Youssef RF, Karakiewicz PI, Lotan Y, Wood CG et al (2010) Preoperative multivariable prognostic model for prediction of nonorgan confined urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract. J Urol 184:453–458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mason RJ, Kassouf W, Bell DG, Lacombe L, Kapoor A et al (2012) The contemporary role of lymph node dissection during nephroureterectomy in the management of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: the Canadian experience. Urology 79:840–845

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Roscigno M, Brausi M, Heidenreich A, Lotan Y, Margulis V et al (2011) Lymphadenectomy at the time of nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial cancer. Eur Urol 60(4):776–783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Roscigno M, Shariat SF, Margulis V, Karakiewicz P, Remzi M et al (2009) The extent of lymphadenectomy seems to be associated with better survival in patients with nonmetastatic upper-tract urothelial carcinoma: how many lymph nodes should be removed? Eur Urol 56:512–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Roscigno M, Shariat SF, Margulis V, Karakiewicz P, Remzi M et al (2009) Impact of lymph node dissection on cancer specific survival in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma treated with radical nephroureterectomy. J Urol 181:2482–2489

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Seisen T, Colin P, Hupertan V, Yates DR, Xylinas E et al (2014) Post-operative nomogram to predict cancer-specific survival after radical nephroureterectomy in patients with localized and/or locally advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma without metastasis. BJU Int 114(5):733–740

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Roupret M, Hupertan V, Seisen T, Colin P, Xylinas E et al (2013) Prediction of cancer specific survival after radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: development of an optimized postoperative nomogram using decision curve analysis. J Urol 189:1662–1669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Xylinas E, Kluth L, Mangal S, Roupret M, Karakiewicz PI et al (2013) Predictive tools for clinical decision-making and counseling of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. World J Urol 31:31–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Yates DR, Hupertan V, Colin P, Ouzzane A, Descazeaud A et al (2012) Cancer-specific survival after radical nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: proposal and multi-institutional validation of a post-operative nomogram. Br J Cancer 106:1083–1088

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cha EK, Shariat SF, Kormaksson M, Novara G, Chromecki TF et al (2012) Predicting clinical outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur Urol 61:818–825

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jeldres C, Sun M, Lughezzani G, Isbarn H, Shariat SF et al (2010) Highly predictive survival nomogram after upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma. Cancer 116:3774–3784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. American Joint Committee on Cancer (2010) AJCC Cancer Staging Handbook, 7th edn. Springer, New York

  24. Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR, Mostofi FK (1998) The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Bladder Consensus Conference Committee. Am J Surg Pathol 22:1435–1448

  25. Smith AK, Stephenson AJ, Lane BR, Larson BT, Thomas AA et al (2011) Inadequacy of biopsy for diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: implications for conservative management. Urology 78:82–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tavora F, Fajardo DA, Lee TK, Lotan T, Miller JS et al (2009) Small endoscopic biopsies of the ureter and renal pelvis: pathologic pitfalls. Am J Surg Pathol 33:1540–1546

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Scolieri MJ, Paik ML, Brown SL, Resnick MI (2000) Limitations of computed tomography in the preoperative staging of upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Urology 56:930–934

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lehmann J, Suttmann H, Kovac I, Hack M, Kamradt J et al (2007) Transitional cell carcinoma of the ureter: prognostic factors influencing progression and survival. Eur Urol 51:1281–1288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lotan Y, Gupta A, Shariat SF, Palapattu GS, Vazina A et al (2005) Lymphovascular invasion is independently associated with overall survival, cause-specific survival, and local and distant recurrence in patients with negative lymph nodes at radical cystectomy. J Clin Oncol 23:6533–6539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Shariat SF, Svatek RS, Tilki D, Skinner E, Karakiewicz PI et al (2010) International validation of the prognostic value of lymphovascular invasion in patients treated with radical cystectomy. BJU Int 105:1402–1412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bagrodia A, Kuehhas FE, Gayed BA, Wood CG, Raman JD et al (2013) Comparative analysis of oncologic outcomes of partial ureterectomy vs radical nephroureterectomy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Urology 81:972–977

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

There were no conflicts of interest to any of the authors with the content of the manuscript.

Ethical standard

The study followed all known ethics of research. The contents of this manuscript have not been copyrighted or published previously, are not under consideration for publication elsewhere and will not be copyrighted, submitted or published elsewhere while acceptance by the Journal is under consideration.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vitaly Margulis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Youssef, R.F., Krabbe, LM., Shariat, S.F. et al. TALL score for prediction of oncological outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy for high-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma. World J Urol 33, 1965–1972 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1566-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1566-8

Keywords

Navigation