Can lymphovascular invasion replace the prognostic value of lymph node involvement in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma after radical nephroureterectomy?

被引:1
|
作者
Yoo, Eun Sang [1 ]
Ha, Yun-Sok [1 ]
Lee, Jun Nyung [1 ]
Kim, Bum Soo [1 ]
Kim, Bup Wan [1 ]
Byun, Seok-Soo [2 ]
Choi, Young Deuk [3 ,4 ]
Kang, Ho Won [5 ]
Yun, Seok-Joong [5 ]
Kim, Wun-Jae [5 ]
Kim, Jeong Hyun [6 ]
Kwon, Tae Gyun [1 ]
机构
[1] Kyungpook Natl Univ, Sch Med, Dept Urol, Daegu, South Korea
[2] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Urol, Bundang Hosp, Songnam, South Korea
[3] Yonsei Univ, Dept Urol, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea
[4] Yonsei Univ, Urol Sci Inst, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea
[5] Chungbuk Natl Univ, Dept Urol, Coll Med, Cheongju, Chungbuk, South Korea
[6] Kangwon Natl Univ, Dept Urol, Sch Med, Chunchon, South Korea
来源
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
UPPER URINARY-TRACT; TRANSITIONAL-CELL CARCINOMA; ONCOLOGICAL OUTCOMES; LAPAROSCOPIC NEPHROURETERECTOMY; ADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY; IMPACT; BLADDER; CANCER; LYMPHADENECTOMY; CLASSIFICATION;
D O I
10.5489/cuaj.3557
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate whether lymphovascular invasion (LVI) can replace lymph node (LN) involvement as a prognostic marker in patients who do not undergo lymph node dissection (LND) during surgery in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Methods: A total of 505 patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) were recruited from four academic centres and divided into four groups: node negative (N0, Group 1); node positive (N+, Group 2); no LND without LVI (NxLVI-, Group 3); and no LND with LVI (NxLVI+, Group 4). Results: Patients in Group 2 had larger tumours, a higher incidence of left-sided involvement, more aggressive T stage and grade, and a higher positive surgical margin rate than patients in other groups. Pathological features (T stage and grade) were poorer in Group 4 than in Groups 1 and 3. Compared to other groups, Group 2 had the worst prognostic outcomes regarding locoregional/distant metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). LVI and LN status in Group 4 was not associated with MFS in multivariate analysis. Among Nx diseases, LVI was not an independent predictor of MFS or CCS. The small number of cases in Groups 2 and 4 is a major limitation of this study. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes according to LVI did not correlate with those outcomes predicted by LN involvement in patients with UTUC. Therefore, LVI may not be used as a substitute for nodal status in patients who do not undergo LND at the time of surgery.
引用
收藏
页码:E229 / E236
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Prognostic Value of Lymphovascular Invasion in Node-Negative Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Patients Undergoing Radical Nephroureterectomy
    Liu, Wen
    Zhou, Zhonghan
    Dong, Dahai
    Sun, Lijiang
    Zhang, Guiming
    [J]. YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2019, 60 (02) : 174 - 181
  • [2] Prognostic indicators for upper tract urothelial carcinoma after radical nephroureterectomy: the impact of lymphovascular invasion
    Godfrey, Mark S.
    Badalato, Gina M.
    Hruby, Gregory W.
    Razmjoo, Mani
    McKiernan, James M.
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 110 (06) : 798 - 803
  • [3] CAN LYMPHOVASCULAR INVASION BE USED AS A SURROGATE FOR LYMPH NODE INVOLVEMENT IN PATIENTS WITH UPPER TRACT UROTHELIAL CARCINOMA?
    Pedrosa, Jose A.
    Kaimakliotis, Hristos Z.
    Monn, M. Francesca
    Masterson, Timothy A.
    Sundaram, Chandru P.
    Koch, Michael O.
    Bihrle, Richard
    Boris, Ronald S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 191 (04): : E919 - E919
  • [4] Impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma and lymphovascular invasion after radical nephroureterectomy
    Lee, Kwang Suk
    Kim, Kwang Hyun
    Yoon, Young Eun
    Choi, Kyung Hwa
    Yang, Seung Choul
    Han, Woong Kyu
    [J]. KOREAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 56 (01) : 41 - 47
  • [5] Impact of lymphovascular invasion on oncological outcomes in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma after radical nephroureterectomy
    Hurel, Sophie
    Roupret, Morgan
    Ouzzane, Adil
    Rozet, Francois
    Xylinas, Evanguelos
    Zerbib, Marc
    Berod, Alexis Arvin
    Ruffion, Alain
    Adam, Emilie
    Cussenot, Olivier
    Houlgatte, Alain
    Phe, Veronique
    Nouhaud, Francois-Xavier
    Bensadoun, Henri
    Delage, Francky
    Guillotreau, Julien
    Guy, Laurent
    Karsenty, Gilles
    De La Taille, Alexandre
    Colin, Pierre
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2013, 111 (08) : 1199 - 1207
  • [6] Lymphovascular invasion have a similar prognostic value as lymph node involvement in patients undergoing radical cystectomy with urothelial carcinoma
    Yuk, Hyeong Dong
    Jeong, Chang Wook
    Kwak, Cheol
    Kim, Hyeon Hoe
    Ku, Ja Hyeon
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2018, 8
  • [7] Lymphovascular invasion have a similar prognostic value as lymph node involvement in patients undergoing radical cystectomy with urothelial carcinoma
    Hyeong Dong Yuk
    Chang Wook Jeong
    Cheol Kwak
    Hyeon Hoe Kim
    Ja Hyeon Ku
    [J]. Scientific Reports, 8
  • [8] Prognostic Value of Comorbidity for Patients with Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma after Radical Nephroureterectomy
    Ke, Hung-Lung
    Li, Ching-Chia
    Lee, Hsiang-Ying
    Tu, Hung-Pin
    Wei, Yu-Ching
    Yeh, Hsin-Chih
    Wu, Wen-Jeng
    Li, Wei-Ming
    [J]. CANCERS, 2022, 14 (06)
  • [9] Prognostic Value of Lymphovascular Invasion in Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma after Radical Nephroureterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Liu, Wen
    Sun, Lijiang
    Guan, Fengju
    Wang, Fangming
    Zhang, Guiming
    [J]. DISEASE MARKERS, 2019, 2019
  • [10] PROGNOSTIC VALUE OF LYMPH NODE YIELD DURING NEPHROURETERECTOMY FOR UPPER TRACT UROTHELIAL CARCINOMA
    Winer, Andrew
    Vertosick, Emily
    Beluco, Renato
    Carlsson, Sigrid
    Kaffenberger, Samuel
    Bagrodia, Aditya
    Murray, Katie
    Sjoberg, Daniel
    Sfakianos, John
    Cha, Eugene
    Dalbagni, Guido
    Coleman, Jonathan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 195 (04): : E367 - E367