Upstaging of urothelial cancer at the time of radical cystectomy: factors associated with upstaging and its effect on outcome
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
UNLABELLED: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The reported discordance between staging on transurethral bladder resection and on radical cystectomy pathology in the literature ranges from 20 to 80%.Correct staging in bladder cancer has direct implications for its management. The upstaging from organ-confined (OC) to non-organ-confined (nOC) disease has been reported in 40% of cases. Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) is a factor known to be associated with poor clinical outcome. Pathological upstaging was observed in our cohort in 40% of cases and most cases (80%) were upstaged from OC to nOC disease. During the study period the frequency of upstaging observed increased. We found LVI (hazard ratio [HR]= 5.07, 95% CI = 3.0-8.3, P < 0.001) and any histological variant variant (HR = 2.77, 95% CI = 1.6-4.8, P < 0.001) to be strong independent predictors of upstaging. Patients with clinical T2 bladder cancer found with upstaging at the time of radical cystectomy had a poorer outcome than patients with no upstaging. Identification of patients at high risk of upstaging at radical cystectomy is key to improving their management and outcome. OBJECTIVES: To analyse the details of bladder cancer (BC) staging in a large combined radical cystectomy (RC) database from two academic centres. To study rate and time trends, as well as risk factors for upstaging, especially clinical factors associated with staging errors after RC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Characteristics of patients undergoing RC at University Health Network, Toronto, Canada (1992-2010) and University of Turku, Turku, Finland (1986-2005) were analysed. RESULTS: Among 602 patients undergoing RC, 306 (51%) had a discordance in clinical and pathological stages. Upstaging occurred in 240 (40%) patients and 192 (32%) patients were upstaged from organ-confined (OC) to non-organ-confined (nOC) disease. During the study period, upstaging became more common in both centres. In multivariate analyses, T2 disease at initial presentation (P= 0.001, odds ratio [OR]= 2.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44-4.77), high grade disease (P= 0.01, OR = 2.85, 95% CI: 1.21-6.7), lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (P < 0.001, OR = 5.17, 95% CI: 3.48-7.68), female gender (P= 0.038, OR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.38-0.97, and histological variants (P < 0.001, OR = 2.77, 95% CI: 1.6-4.8) were associated with a risk of upstaging from OC to nOC disease. Upstaged patients had worse survival rates than patients with correct staging. This was especially significant among patients with carcinoma invading bladder muscle before undergoing RC (16% vs 46% 10-year disease-specific mortality, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Upstaging is a common problem and unfortunately no improvements have been observed during the last two decades. LVI and the presence of histological variants are strong predictors of upstaging at the time of RC. Pathologists should be encouraged to report LVI and any histological variant at the time of TURBT.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».