4.5 Article

The impact of lymph node status and features on oncological outcomes in urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract (UTUC) treated by nephroureterectomy

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages 189-197

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-012-0983-1

Keywords

Lymph node; Lymphadenectomy; Nephroureterectomy; Prognosis; Urothelial carcinoma

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy during radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract (UTUC) is controversial. Our aim was to assess the impact of lymph node status (LNS) on survival in patients treated by RNU. In our multi-institutional, retrospective database, 714 patients with non-metastatic UTUC had undergone RNU between 1995 and 2010. LNS was tested as prognostic factor for survivals through univariate and multivariable Cox regression analysis. Median age was 70 years [interquartile range (IQR), 60-75] with median follow-up of 27 months (IQR, 10-50). Overall, lymphadenectomy was performed in 254 patients (35.5 %). Among these patients, 204 (80 %) had negative lymph nodes (pN0) and 50 (20 %) had positive lymph nodes (pN1/2). The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 81 % [95 % confidence interval (CI), 73-88 %] for pN0 patients, 85 % (95 % CI, 80-90 %) for pNx patients and 47 % (95 % CI, 24-69 %) for pN1/2 patients (p < 0.001). Metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were significantly lower in pN1/2 patients than in pN0 and pNx patients (p < 0.05). On multivariable analysis, LNS did not appear as an independent prognostic factor for CSS, OS or MFS (p > 0.05). In case of lymph node involvement, extra-nodal extension was marginally associated with worse CSS (log rank p = 0.07). The retrospective design was the main limitation. LNS is helpful for survival stratification in patients treated with RNU for UTUC. However, LNS did not appear as an independent predictor of survival in this retrospective series and needs to be investigated in a large multicentre, prospective evaluation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available