World journal of surgical oncology · 2023
Oncological effectiveness of bladder-preserving trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a system review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Su Xiaozhe, Dong Caitao, Liao Wenbiao, Liu Wentao
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Radical cystectomy (RC) is the gold standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). As a bladder-preservation option recommended in guidelines, trimodal therapy (TMT) has become increasingly popular in recent years. However, it is still uncertain whether TMT can provide comparable oncologic outcomes to RC. Therefore, it is imperative to evaluate whether TMT yields comparable outcomes to RC.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of Web of Science, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases up to June 2023 to identify studies that met our inclusion criteria. The primary outcome measures evaluated in this study were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The study quality was evaluated independently by two authors, and data were extracted accordingly.
RESULTS: After excluding duplicates and ineligible articles, our meta-analysis included seven studies involving 3,489 and 13,877 patients in the TMT and RC groups, respectively. Short-term overall survival rates were comparable between the groups, but beyond 5 and > 10-years, the RC group had significantly higher overall survival rates compared to the TMT group. In terms of cancer-specific survival, there was no significant difference between the groups at 1-year follow-up, but from the second year onwards, including the 5-year and > 10-year nodes, the RC group had significantly better outcomes compared to the TMT group.
CONCLUSION: The treatment effect of RC is better than that of TMT. Unless the patient can't tolerate RC or has a strong desire to preserve the bladder, RC should be chosen over TMT in treatment, and patients undergoing TMT should be closely followed up.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of Web of Science, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases up to June 2023 to identify studies that met our inclusion criteria. The primary outcome measures evaluated in this study were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The study quality was evaluated independently by two authors, and data were extracted accordingly.
RESULTS: After excluding duplicates and ineligible articles, our meta-analysis included seven studies involving 3,489 and 13,877 patients in the TMT and RC groups, respectively. Short-term overall survival rates were comparable between the groups, but beyond 5 and > 10-years, the RC group had significantly higher overall survival rates compared to the TMT group. In terms of cancer-specific survival, there was no significant difference between the groups at 1-year follow-up, but from the second year onwards, including the 5-year and > 10-year nodes, the RC group had significantly better outcomes compared to the TMT group.
CONCLUSION: The treatment effect of RC is better than that of TMT. Unless the patient can't tolerate RC or has a strong desire to preserve the bladder, RC should be chosen over TMT in treatment, and patients undergoing TMT should be closely followed up.