Comparative Outcomes of Primary Versus Recurrent High-risk Non–muscle-invasive and Primary Versus Secondary Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer After Radical Cystectomy: Results from a Retrospective Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radical cystectomy (RC) is indicated in primary or secondary muscle-invasive bladder cancer (primMIBC, secMIBC) and in primary or recurrent high- or very high-risk non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (primHR-NMIBC, recHR-NMIBC). The optimal timing for RC along the disease spectrum of nonmetastatic urothelial carcinoma remains unclear. To compare outcomes after RC between patients with primHR-NMIBC, recHR-NMIBC, primMIBC, and secMIBC. This retrospective, multicenter study included patients with clinically nonmetastatic bladder cancer (BC) treated with RC. We assessed oncological outcomes for patients who underwent RC according to the natural history of their BC. primHR-NMIBC and primMIBC were defined as no prior history of BC, and recHR-NMIBC and secMIBC as previously treated NMIBC that recurred or progressed to MIBC, respectively. Log-rank analysis was used to compare survival outcomes, and univariable and multivariable Cox and logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors for survival. Among the 908 patients included, 211 (23%) had primHR-NMIBC, 125 (14%) had recHR-NMIBC, 404 (44%) had primMIBC, and 168 (19%) had secMIBC. Lymph node involvement and pathological upstaging were more frequent in the secMIBC group than in the other groups (p < 0.001). The median follow-up was 37 mo. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were 77.9%, 83.2%, and 72.7% in primHR-NMIBC, 60.0%, 59%, and 48.9% in recHR-NMIBC, 60.9%, 64.5%, and 54.8% in primMIBC, and 41.3%, 46.5%, and 39% in secMIBC, respectively, with statistically significant differences across all survival outcomes except between recHR-NMIBC and primMIBC. On multivariable Cox regression, recHR-NMIBC was independently associated with shorter RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.64; p = 0.03), CSS (HR 1.79; p = 0.01), and OS (HR 1.45; p = 0.03), and secMIBC was associated with shorter CSS (HR 1.77; p = 0.01) and OS (HR 1.57; p = 0.006). Limitations include the biases inherent to the retrospective study design. Patients with recHR-NMIBC and primHR-MIBC had similar survival outcomes, while those with sec-MIBC had the worst outcomes. Therefore, early radical intervention may be indicated in selected patients, and potentially neoadjuvant systemic therapies in some patients with recHR-NMIBC. We compared cancer outcomes in different bladder cancer scenarios in a large, multinational series of patients who underwent removal of the bladder with curative intent. We found that patients who experienced recurrence of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) had similar survival outcomes to those with initial muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), while patients who experienced progression of NMIBC to MIBC had the worst outcomes. Selected patients with non–muscle-invasive disease may benefit from early radical surgery or from perioperative chemotherapy or immunotherapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".