Department of Urology Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11 Pt B):E590-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11325.x. Epub 2012 Jul 3.
What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Patients with positive lymph nodes at radical cystectomy have a poor prognosis. The actual outcome of patients varies based on many factors, among which lymph node density has emerged as being more informative than nodal status of TNM staging. We combined clinical data from two major cancer centres in the USA and identified patients with an adequate lymphadenectomy and no perioperative chemotherapy to understand the natural history of the disease. Using this information, we created prognostic tools incorporating lymph node density that can be used for risk stratification, patient counselling and clinical trial design.
• To develop a clinical tool based on lymph node density (LND) for patient counselling after radical cystectomy and for design of clinical trials of adjuvant therapies after radical cystectomy.
• Using pooled data from two comprehensive cancer centres, we identified patients with lymph node metastases after radical cystectomy who received an adequate lymph node dissection according to existing literature (resection of eight or more nodes). • Only patients who had not received neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy were included to ensure that prediction models were based on the natural course of the disease. • Thresholds for LND ranging from 5% to 35%, in 5% increments, were used to dichotomize the study population. Within each set of two groups, the Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimator was used to estimate disease-specific survival (DSS) for each group, and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to test the significance of differences in DSS between the group with higher LND and the group with lower LND. • Tables and graphs showing the relationship between LND categories and 2-year and 5-year estimated DSS were created to aid in clinical decision-making.
• LND was valuable as a tool for stratifying node-positive patients into different risk groups based on expected survival. • At each LND threshold from 10% to 35%, patients with higher LND had significantly worse DSS than patients with lower LND (P ≤ 0.001). • As expected, DSS in the higher-LND group worsened with each 5% increase in LND threshold: patients with LND > 35% had a 5-year DSS rate of 4%. • Using our data as a tool, multiple cut-offs can be employed to categorize patients into various risk groups with different risk. For example, patients with LND ≤ 10% have an estimated 5-year DSS rate of 61.9%, whereas patients with LND > 15% have an estimated 5-year DSS rate of 19.2%.
• Patients with node-positive bladder cancer have poor outcomes, and survival varies widely according to LND. • Categorical LND should be used to risk-stratify patients for counselling regarding prognosis. • Furthermore, categorical LND should be used as a tool for designing and reporting on clinical trials of adjuvant therapies.
根治性膀胱切除术患者的淋巴结阳性预示着预后不良。然而,患者的实际结局受到多种因素的影响,其中淋巴结密度比 TNM 分期的淋巴结状态更具信息性。本研究将美国两个主要癌症中心的临床数据相结合,选择了接受充分淋巴结清扫术且无围手术期化疗的患者,以了解疾病的自然病程。利用这些信息,我们创建了包含淋巴结密度的预后工具,可用于风险分层、患者咨询和临床试验设计。
• 开发一种基于淋巴结密度(LND)的临床工具,用于根治性膀胱切除术后的患者咨询,并用于设计根治性膀胱切除术后辅助治疗的临床试验。
• 我们利用两个综合性癌症中心的汇总数据,确定了接受根治性膀胱切除术且根据现有文献(切除 8 个或更多淋巴结)进行了充分淋巴结清扫术的淋巴结转移患者。• 仅纳入未接受新辅助或辅助化疗的患者,以确保预测模型基于疾病的自然病程。• 将 LND 阈值从 5%到 35%,每隔 5%分为一组,将研究人群分为两组。在每组的两组中,使用 Kaplan-Meier 乘积限估计器估计每组的疾病特异性生存率(DSS),并使用 Cox 比例风险回归检验 LND 较高组与 LND 较低组之间 DSS 的显著性差异。• 创建了显示 LND 类别与 2 年和 5 年估计 DSS 之间关系的表格和图表,以帮助临床决策。
• LND 是一种将淋巴结阳性患者分层为不同风险组的有效工具,可根据预期生存情况进行分层。• 在从 10%到 35%的每个 LND 阈值处,LND 较高的患者的 DSS明显低于 LND 较低的患者(P≤0.001)。• 正如预期的那样,随着 LND 阈值的每增加 5%,高 LND 组的 DSS 会恶化:LND>35%的患者 5 年 DSS 率为 4%。• 使用我们的数据作为工具,可以采用多种截止值将患者分为不同风险的不同风险组。例如,LND≤10%的患者估计 5 年 DSS 率为 61.9%,而 LND>15%的患者估计 5 年 DSS 率为 19.2%。
• 淋巴结阳性膀胱癌患者的预后不良,且生存情况随 LND 而广泛变化。• 分类 LND 应用于为预后咨询对患者进行风险分层。• 此外,分类 LND 应作为设计和报告辅助治疗临床试验的工具。