4.4 Article

Late Recurrence and Progression in Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancers After 5-year Tumor-free Periods

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 75, Issue 6, Pages 1385-1390

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.09.088

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the recurrence and progression in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder tumors who remained tumor-free for at least 5 years, which should assist in the development of schedules of their follow-up evaluations. Non-muscle-invasive bladder tumors that recur or progress at a late time point are not rare. METHODS Between 1985 and 2002, 814 cases diagnosed with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer were treated with transurethral resection. Of these 814 cases, 262 patients with no tumor recurrence for more than 5 years were included in the study. The median follow-up interval was 10.0 years. RESULTS During the follow-up period, 39 tumors (14.9%) showed tumor recurrence. The 5- and 10-year recurrence-free survival rates were 81.6% and 76.0%, respectively. There was no significant difference in tumor recurrence among the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups based on the current clinical guideline. Only the use of intravesical mitomycin C was determined to be a significant unfavorable risk factor for late recurrence. Five patients (1.9%) experienced stage progression, 3 of whom did not have metastases at the time of diagnosis of the progression but died because of bladder cancer disease. CONCLUSIONS After a 5-year tumor-free period, even in the low-risk group, recurrence occurred at a late time point to a degree that was the same as that for the intermediate-and high-risk groups. Finally, some of the high-risk patients experienced late progression with a high degree of malignant behavior, suggesting longer follow-up is needed for each patient. UROLOGY 75: 1385-1391, 2010. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available