Multi-institutional matched comparison of radical cystectomy to trimodality therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
433 Background: Prior randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing bladder preservation to radical cystectomy (RC) for muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) closed early due to lack of accrual. Given that no future RCTs are foreseen, and in the absence of level 1 data, we aimed to provide the best evidence possible on outcomes of matched cohorts comparing trimodality therapy (TMT, maximal transurethral resection of bladder tumor followed by concurrent chemoradiation) to RC in order to guide management. Methods: This retrospective analysis included 703 patients with MIBC clinical stage T2-T3/4aN0M0 MIBC urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, 421 RC and 282 TMT who would have been eligible for both TMT or RC, treated at the Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto; and University of Southern California, Los Angeles between 2005-2017. To compare homogeneous cohorts, all patients included in this analysis had solitary tumors < 7 cm, no or unilateral hydronephrosis, and no multifocal carcinoma in situ. Treatment propensity scores were estimated using logistic regression, and patients were matched 3:1 with replacement. Covariates included age, sex, clinical T stage, hydronephrosis, (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, body mass index, smoking history, and ECOG status. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with adjusted Cox models; cancer-specific survival (CSS), distant failure-free survival, pelvic nodal failure-free survival and metastasis-free survival (combined distant and pelvic nodal failure) were estimated with adjusted competing risk models. Our primary endpoint of interest was metastasis-free survival. The analysis was performed as intent-to-treat. Results: The 3:1 matched cohort comprised of 1,116 patients (834 RC vs 282 TMT). After matching, age (71.3 vs 71.6), cT2 clinical stage (88 vs 90%), presence of hydronephrosis (12 vs 10%), and use of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy (60 vs 65%) were similar between RC and TMT cohorts. Salvage cystectomy was performed in 38 patients (13%) treated by TMT. At 5 years, metastasis-free (73 vs 78%, p = 0.07), distant failure-free (78 vs 82%, p = 0.14), and pelvic nodal failure-free (96 vs 94%, p = 0.33) survival were not statistically different between RC and TMT, whereas CSS and OS favored TMT (78 vs 85%, p = 0.02; 70 vs 78%, p < 0.001). Outcomes for RC and TMT were not different among centers. Final pT stage in the RC patients was: pT0 14%, pT1 7%, pT2 29%, pT3/4 42% and N+ 24%. Peri RC mortality was 2.1% and median number of nodes removed was 40. NMIBC recurrence occurred in 57/278 (20.5%) TMT patients. Conclusions: This large multi-institutional contemporary study provides the best evidence to date, in the absence of randomized trials, supporting TMT for select patients with MIBC. Oncologic outcomes seem to be equivalent between TMT and RC, affirming the position that TMT should be offered as an effective alternative.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".