Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Complications, in-Hospital Mortality, Length of Stay and Total Hospital Costs in Bladder Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy

. 2022 Feb 26 ; 14 (5) : . [epub] 20220226

Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko Médium electronic

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid35267529

Background: To test for differences in complication rates, in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) and total hospital costs (THCs) in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) prior to radical cystectomy (RC). Methods: Within the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2016−2019), we identified RC-treated, non-metastatic, lymph-node negative bladder cancer patients, stratified by NAC status. Trend analyses, multivariable logistic, multivariable Poisson and multivariable linear regression models were used. Results: We identified 4347 RC-treated bladder cancer patients. Of those, 805 (19%) received NAC prior to RC. Overall, complications rates did not differ (65 vs. 66%; p = 0.7). However, NAC patients harbored lower rates of surgical site (6 vs. 9%), cardiac (13 vs. 19%) and genitourinary (5.5 vs. 9.7%) complications. In-hospital mortality (<1.7 vs. 1.8%) and LOS (6 vs. 7 days) was lower in NAC patients (all p < 0.05). Moreover, NAC was an independent predictor of shorter LOS in multivariable Poisson regression models (Risk ratio: 0.86; p < 0.001) and an independent predictor for higher THCs in multivariable linear regression models (Odds ratio: 1474$; p = 0.02). Conclusion: NAC was not associated with higher complication rates and in-hospital mortality. Contrary, NAC was associated with shorter LOS, yet moderately higher THCs. The current analysis suggests no detriment from NAC in the context of RC.

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit Division of Urology University of Montréal Health Center Montréal QC H4A 3J1 Canada

Department of Maternal Child and Urological Sciences Sapienza Rome University Policlinico Umberto 1 Hospital 00185 Rome Italy

Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences University of Genova 16132 Genova Italy

Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University 128 08 Prague Czech Republic

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna 1090 Vienna Austria

Department of Urology Koc University Hospital Istanbul 34450 Turkey

Department of Urology University Hospital Frankfurt Goethe University Frankfurt am Main 60596 Frankfurt am Main Germany

Department of Urology University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf 20246 Hamburg Germany

Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Dallas TX 75390 USA

Department of Urology University of Verona Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona 37134 Verona Italy

Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York NY 10021 USA

Division of Experimental Oncology Unit of Urology URI Urological Research Institute IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute 20132 Milan Italy

Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research Al Ahliyya Amman University Amman 19328 Jordan

Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health 1 M Sechenov 1st Moscow State Medical University 119992 Moscow Russia

Martini Klinik Prostate Cancer Center University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf 20251 Hamburg Germany

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Witjes J.A., Bruins H.M., Cathomas R., Compérat E., Cowan N.C., Efstathiou J.A., Fietkau R., Gakis G., Hernández V., Lorch A., et al. Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer. EAU Guidelines. Edn; Presented at the EAU Annual Congress; Milan, Italy. 9–13 July 2021;

NCCN Guidelines Version 5.2021 Bladder Cancer. [(accessed on 10 November 2021)]. Available online: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/bladdercancer.pdf.

Grossman H.B., Natale R.B., Tangen C.M., Speights V.O., Vogelzang N.J., Trump D.L., de Vere White R.W., Sarosdy M.F., Wood D.P., Raghavan D., et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus cystectomy compared with cystectomy alone for locally advanced bladder cancer. N Eng. J. Med. 2003;349:859–866. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa022148. PubMed DOI

International Collaboration of Trialists on behalf of the Medical Research Council Advanced Bladder Cancer Working Party (Now the National Cancer Research Institute Bladder Cancer Clinical Studies Group) The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Group. The Australian Bladder Cancer Study Group. The National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Finnbladder, Norwegian Bladder Cancer Study Group Club Urologico Espanol de Tratamiento Oncologic International Phase III Trial Assessing Neoadjuvant Cisplatin, Methotrexate, and Vinblastine Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Long-Term Results of the BA06 30894 Trial. JCO. 2011;29:2171–2177. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.32.3139. PubMed DOI PMC

Yin M., Joshi M., Meijer R.P., Glantz M., Holder S., Harvey H.A., Kaag M., Fransen van de Putte E.E., Horenblas S., Drabick J.J. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Two-Step Meta-Analysis. Oncologist. 2016;21:708–715. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0440. PubMed DOI PMC

Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2003;361:1927–1934. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13580-5. PubMed DOI

Winquist E., Kirchner T.S., Segal R., Chin J., Lukka H., Genitourinary Cancer Disease Site Group, Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence-based Care Practice Guidelines Initiative Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Urol. 2004;171:561–569. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000090967.08622.33. PubMed DOI

Pfister C., Gravis G., Fléchon A., Soulié M., Guy L., Laguerre B., Mottet N., Joly F., Allory Y., Harter V., et al. Randomized Phase III Trial of Dose-dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin, or Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as Perioperative Chemotherapy for Patients with Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer. Analysis of the GETUG/AFU V05 VESPER Trial Secondary Endpoints: Chemotherapy Toxicity and Pathological Responses. Eur. Urol. 2021;79:214–221. PubMed

Johnson D.C., Nielsen M.E., Matthews J., Woods M.E., Wallen E.M., Pruthi R.S., Milowsky M.I., Smith A.B. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for bladder cancer does not increase risk of perioperative morbidity: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy utilization and perioperative morbidity. BJU Int. 2014;114:221–228. doi: 10.1111/bju.12585. PubMed DOI PMC

Gandaglia G., Popa I., Abdollah F., Schiffmann J., Shariat S.F., Briganti A., Montorsi F., Trinh Q.-D., Karakiewicz P.I., Sun M. The Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Who Have Bladder Cancer Treated with Radical Cystectomy: A Population-based Study. Eur. Urol. 2014;66:561–568. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.014. PubMed DOI

Jerlström T., Chen R., Liedberg F., Andrén O., Ströck V., Aljabery F.A.S., Hosseini A., Sherif A., Malmström P.-U., Ullén A., et al. No increased risk of short-term complications after radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer among patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy: A nation-wide register-based study. World J. Urol. 2020;38:381–388. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02770-2. PubMed DOI PMC

Salminen A.P., Koskinen I., Perez I.M., Hurme S., Murtola T.J., Vaarala M.H., Nykopp T.K., Seppänen M., Isotalo T., Marttila T., et al. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Does Not Increase the Morbidity of Radical Cystectomy: A 10-year Retrospective Nationwide Study. Eur. Urol. Oncol. 2018;1:525–530. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.06.014. PubMed DOI

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Rockville, M.D. HCUP National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Rockville, MD, USA: 2012. [(accessed on 1 February 2022)]. Available online: www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nisoverview.jsp.

Lyon T.D., Faraj K.S., Brennan E., Tyson M.D., Boorjian S.A., Spaulding A.C. Defining radical cystectomy using the ICD-10 procedure coding system. Urol. Oncol. Semin. Orig. Investig. 2021 doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.09.013. PubMed DOI

Palumbo C., Knipper S., Pecoraro A., Rosiello G., Luzzago S., Deuker M., Tian Z., Shariat S.F., Simeone C., Briganti A., et al. Patient frailty predicts worse perioperative outcomes and higher cost after radical cystectomy. Surg. Oncol. 2020;32:8–13. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2019.10.014. PubMed DOI

Mazzone E., Preisser F., Nazzani S., Tian Z., Zaffuto E., Gallina A., Tilki D., Montorsi F., Shariat S.F., Saad F., et al. The effect of age and comorbidities on early postoperative complications after radical cystectomy: A contemporary population-based analysis. J. Geriatr. Oncol. 2019;10:623–631. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2019.04.011. PubMed DOI

Preisser F., Nazzani S., Mazzone E., Marchioni M., Bandini M., Tian Z., Haese A., Saad F., Zorn K., Montorsi F., et al. Comparison of Open Versus Robotically Assisted Cytoreductive Radical Prostatectomy for Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Clin. Genitourin. Cancer. 2019;17:e939–e945. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.05.022. PubMed DOI

Storesund A., Haugen A.S., Hjortås M., Nortvedt M.W., Flaatten H., Eide G.E., Boermeester M.A., Sevdalis N., Søfteland E. Accuracy of surgical complication rate estimation using ICD-10 codes. Br. J. Surg. 2019;106:236–244. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10985. PubMed DOI PMC

Bhanvadia R., Ashbrook C., Gahan J., Mauck R., Bagrodia A., Margulis V., Lotan Y., Roehrborn C., Woldu S. Perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic vs open simple prostatectomy in the modern robotic era: Results from the National Inpatient Sample. BJU Int. 2021;128:168–177. doi: 10.1111/bju.15258. PubMed DOI

United States Department of Labor. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index. [(accessed on 10 October 2021)]; Available online: https://www.bls.gov/cpi/

Deyo R. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1992;45:613–619. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90133-8. PubMed DOI

Glasheen W.P., Cordier T., Gumpina R., Haugh G., Davis J., Renda A. Charlson Comorbidity Index: ICD-9 Update and ICD-10 Translation. Am. Health Drug Benefits. 2019;12:188–197. PubMed PMC

Preisser F., Nazzani S., Mazzone E., Knipper S., Bandini M., Tian Z., Haese A., Saad F., Zorn K.C., Montorsi F., et al. Regional differences in total hospital charges between open and robotically assisted radical prostatectomy in the United States. World J. Urol. 2019;37:1305–1313. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2525-y. PubMed DOI

Hoeh B., Preisser F., Mandel P., Wenzel M., Humke C., Welte M.-N., Müller M., Köllermann J., Wild P., Kluth L.A., et al. Inverse Stage Migration in Radical Prostatectomy-A Sustaining Phenomenon. Front. Surg. 2021;8:612813. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.612813. PubMed DOI PMC

RCT R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. [(accessed on 1 February 2022)]. Available online: https://wwwr-projectorg2017.

McFerrin C., Davaro F., May A., Raza S., Siddiqui S., Hamilton Z. Trends in utilization of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer. Investig. Clin. Urol. 2020;61:565–572. doi: 10.4111/icu.20200132. PubMed DOI PMC

Patafio F.M., Mackillop W.J., Feldman-Stewart D., Siemens D.R., Booth C.M. Why is perioperative chemotherapy for bladder cancer underutilized? Urol. Oncol. 2014;32:391–395. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.11.003. PubMed DOI

Hanna N., Trinh Q.-D., Seisen T., Vetterlein M.W., Sammon J., Preston M.A., Lipsitz S.R., Bellmunt J., Menon M., Choueiri T.K., et al. Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer in the Current Real World Setting in the USA. Eur. Urol. Oncol. 2018;1:83–90. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.03.001. PubMed DOI

Gray P.J., Fedewa S.A., Shipley W.U., Efstathiou J.A., Lin C.C., Zietman A.L., Virgo K.S. Use of Potentially Curative Therapies for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer in the United States: Results from the National Cancer Data Base. Eur. Urol. 2013;63:823–829. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.015. PubMed DOI

National Cancer Database. [(accessed on 5 July 2021)]. Available online: http://ncdbpuf.facs.org/

Batista Rodríguez G., Balla A., Fernández-Ananín S., Balagué C., Targarona E.M. The Era of the Large Databases: Outcomes After Gastroesophageal Surgery According to NSQIP, NIS, and NCDB Databases. Systematic Literature Review. Surg. Innov. 2018;25:400–412. doi: 10.1177/1553350618775539. PubMed DOI

Vetterlein M.W., Meyer C.P., Leyh-Bannurah S.-R., Mayr R., Gierth M., Fritsche H.-M., Burger M., Keck B., Wullich B., Martini T., et al. Effect of Hospital and Surgeon Case Volume on Perioperative Quality of Care and Short-term Outcomes After Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: Results from a European Tertiary Care Center Cohort. Clin. Genitourin. Cancer. 2017;15:e809–e817. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2017.04.021. PubMed DOI

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Pouze přihlášení uživatelé

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...