• Something wrong with this record ?

The role of surgical resection of the primary tumor in metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

M. Kardoust Parizi, N. Singla, M. Rouprêt, V. Margulis, A. Matsukawa, I. Tsuboi, R. Schulz, PI. Karakiewicz, JY. Teoh, F. Soria, SF. Shariat

. 2025 ; 35 (3) : 284-291. [pub] 20250310

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article, Meta-Analysis, Systematic Review

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc25015925

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate the role of extirpative surgery for the primary tumor in metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (mUTUC). RECENT FINDINGS: The PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched on July 2024 to identify relevant studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review (PRISMA) statement. Studies were eligible for analysis if they compared oncologic outcomes between mUTUC patients who underwent surgical resection of the primary tumor and patients who did not. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using multivariate logistic regression analyses. We identified 2686 reports, of which 11 articles comprising 12 833 records were selected for this systematic review. Eight and three studies used Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) and National Cancer Database (NCDB) databases, respectively. Surgical resection of the primary tumor was significantly associated with better CSS and OS in patients with mUTUC. Among the 5353 mUTUC patients included in our meta-analysis, radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) was independently associated with better OS with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.72, P < 0.05]. Subgroup analyses of studies restricted to mUTUC patients with distant lymph node metastasis ( n = 1372) revealed RNU to be independently associated with better OS with pooled HR: 0.44 (95% CI 0.28-0.67, P < 0.05) together with systemic chemotherapy, primary tumor site in the ureter, lower T stage, and no locoregional lymph node involvement. SUMMARY: Surgical resection of the primary tumor offers oncologic survival benefits in select patients with mUTUC. However, in the absence of data from prospective randomized studies, it is essential to evaluate each patient individually as part of a collaborative multidisciplinary shared decision working with the patient.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25015925
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250731091348.0
007      
ta
008      
250708s2025 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1097/MOU.0000000000001276 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)40066655
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Kardoust Parizi, Mehdi $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
245    14
$a The role of surgical resection of the primary tumor in metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis / $c M. Kardoust Parizi, N. Singla, M. Rouprêt, V. Margulis, A. Matsukawa, I. Tsuboi, R. Schulz, PI. Karakiewicz, JY. Teoh, F. Soria, SF. Shariat
520    9_
$a PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate the role of extirpative surgery for the primary tumor in metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (mUTUC). RECENT FINDINGS: The PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched on July 2024 to identify relevant studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review (PRISMA) statement. Studies were eligible for analysis if they compared oncologic outcomes between mUTUC patients who underwent surgical resection of the primary tumor and patients who did not. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using multivariate logistic regression analyses. We identified 2686 reports, of which 11 articles comprising 12 833 records were selected for this systematic review. Eight and three studies used Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) and National Cancer Database (NCDB) databases, respectively. Surgical resection of the primary tumor was significantly associated with better CSS and OS in patients with mUTUC. Among the 5353 mUTUC patients included in our meta-analysis, radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) was independently associated with better OS with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.72, P < 0.05]. Subgroup analyses of studies restricted to mUTUC patients with distant lymph node metastasis ( n = 1372) revealed RNU to be independently associated with better OS with pooled HR: 0.44 (95% CI 0.28-0.67, P < 0.05) together with systemic chemotherapy, primary tumor site in the ureter, lower T stage, and no locoregional lymph node involvement. SUMMARY: Surgical resection of the primary tumor offers oncologic survival benefits in select patients with mUTUC. However, in the absence of data from prospective randomized studies, it is essential to evaluate each patient individually as part of a collaborative multidisciplinary shared decision working with the patient.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a karcinom z přechodných buněk $x chirurgie $x mortalita $x sekundární $x patologie $7 D002295
650    12
$a nádory ledvin $x chirurgie $x mortalita $x patologie $7 D007680
650    12
$a nefrektomie $x metody $7 D009392
650    12
$a nefroureterektomie $7 D000074682
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    12
$a nádory močovodu $x chirurgie $x mortalita $x patologie $7 D014516
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a metaanalýza $7 D017418
655    _2
$a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
700    1_
$a Singla, Nirmish $u Departments of Urology and Oncology, James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
700    1_
$a Rouprêt, Morgan $u Department of Urology, Pitié Salpêtrière Hospital, AP-HP, GRC 5, Predictive Onco-Urology, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
700    1_
$a Margulis, Vitaly $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
700    1_
$a Matsukawa, Akihiro $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo
700    1_
$a Tsuboi, Ichiro $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Shimane University Faculty of Medicine, Shimane, Japan
700    1_
$a Schulz, Robert $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Karakiewicz, Pierre I $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
700    1_
$a Teoh, Jeremy Yuen-Chun $u Department of Surgery, S.H. Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
700    1_
$a Soria, Francesco $u Department of Urology, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino School of Medicine, Turin, Italy
700    1_
$a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA $u Department of Urology, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino School of Medicine, Turin, Italy $u Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA $u Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $u Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan $u Research Center for Evidence Medicine, Urology Department Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
773    0_
$w MED00001296 $t Current opinion in urology $x 1473-6586 $g Roč. 35, č. 3 (2025), s. 284-291
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40066655 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250708 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250731091343 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2366636 $s 1253050
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2025 $b 35 $c 3 $d 284-291 $e 20250310 $i 1473-6586 $m Current opinion in urology $n Curr Opin Urol $x MED00001296
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250708

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options