BJU international · 2013
Impact of lymphovascular invasion on oncological outcomes in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma after radical nephroureterectomy.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hurel Sophie, Rouprêt Morgan, Ouzzane Adil, Rozet François, Xylinas Evanguelos, Zerbib Marc, Berod Alexis Arvin, Ruffion Alain, Adam Emilie, Cussenot Olivier, Houlgatte Alain, Phé Véronique, Nouhaud François-Xavier, Bensadoun Henri, Delage Francky, Guillotreau Julien, Guy Laurent, Karsenty Gilles, De La Taille Alexandre, Colin Pierre, French Collaborative National Database on UTUC
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) on upper urinary tract urothelial carcinomas (UTUCs) in a multicentre study on cancer-specific survival (CSS), recurrence-free survival and metastasis-free survival (MFS). To show the negative impact of LVI for patients with pN0/x disease and to stratify these patients into risk groups for metastatic relapse.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentre retrospective study was performed on patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy between 1995 and 2010. LVI status was evaluated as a prognostic factor for survival using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis.
RESULTS: Overall, 551 patients were included and were divided into two groups: those without LVI (LVI-), n = 388 and those with LVI (LVI+), n = 163. LVI+ status was associated with high stage and grade UTUC and lymph node metastasis (P < 0.001). The 5-year CSS and MFS rates were significantly worse in the LVI+ group than in LVI- group (52.2 vs 84.5%, P < 0.001 and 43.8 vs 82.7%, P < 0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, LVI+ status was an independent prognostic factor for CSS and MFS (P = 0.04 and P < 0.001). These findings were confirmed for the pN0/x patient subgroup (n = 504, P < 0.001). In the pN0/x patient subgroup, we described a prognostic tool for MFS based on independent factors that permitted us to stratify patients into groups of high, intermediate or low risk of metastasis relapse.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of LVI was a strong predictor of a poor outcome for UTUC. When a lymphadenectomy has not been achieved, the report of LVI status is crucial to identfiy those patients at higher risk for metastatic relapse.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentre retrospective study was performed on patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy between 1995 and 2010. LVI status was evaluated as a prognostic factor for survival using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis.
RESULTS: Overall, 551 patients were included and were divided into two groups: those without LVI (LVI-), n = 388 and those with LVI (LVI+), n = 163. LVI+ status was associated with high stage and grade UTUC and lymph node metastasis (P < 0.001). The 5-year CSS and MFS rates were significantly worse in the LVI+ group than in LVI- group (52.2 vs 84.5%, P < 0.001 and 43.8 vs 82.7%, P < 0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, LVI+ status was an independent prognostic factor for CSS and MFS (P = 0.04 and P < 0.001). These findings were confirmed for the pN0/x patient subgroup (n = 504, P < 0.001). In the pN0/x patient subgroup, we described a prognostic tool for MFS based on independent factors that permitted us to stratify patients into groups of high, intermediate or low risk of metastasis relapse.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of LVI was a strong predictor of a poor outcome for UTUC. When a lymphadenectomy has not been achieved, the report of LVI status is crucial to identfiy those patients at higher risk for metastatic relapse.