Patriarca Carlo, Hurle Rodolfo, Moschini Marco, Freschi Massimo, Colombo Piergiuseppe, Colecchia Maurizio, Ferrari Lucia, Guazzoni Giorgio, Conti Andrea, Conti Giario, Lucianò Roberta, Magnani Tiziana, Colombo Renzo
Department of Pathology, Azienda Ospedaliera Sant'Anna, 22020, Como, Italy.
Department of Urology, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano (MI), Italy.
Diagn Pathol. 2016 Jan 20;11:6. doi: 10.1186/s13000-016-0466-6.
When treating bladder cancer patients, the most significant problems usually concern cases with high-grade non-muscle-invasive carcinoma, and a better understanding of which patients would benefit from early radical cystectomy is urgently needed. The uropathology community is seeking more user-friendly approaches to distinguishing between T1 cancers exhibiting different types of clinical behavior.
After a retrospective review, we selected a group of 314 patients who underwent transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB) and were diagnosed with high-grade urothelial carcinoma staged as T1. Three different substaging systems were applied: one was the anatomy-based T1 a/b; and two involved micrometric thresholds of either 0.5 mm of invasion (as proposed by van Rhijn et al.), or 1 mm of invasion (as proposed in the present study). Early reTUR (repeated transurethral resection) was performed in 250 patients, and the same substaging approaches were applied to cases of T1.
It proved feasible to apply the 1 mm substaging system in 100 % of cases, the van Rhijn system in 100 %, and the anatomy-based method (T1 a/b) in 72.3 % of cases. At a mean follow-up of 46 months, the recurrence-free survival rate was significantly better (p < 0.001) in the group that underwent reTUR, while none of the three substaging systems reliably predicted recurrences. The 1 mm did seem promising, however, as a threshold for predicting progression, reaching statistical significance in the Kaplan Meier estimates (p < 0.04).
Our study shows that micrometric substaging is feasible in this setting and should be extended to include any early reTUR to complete the substaging done after the first TURB. It can also provide helpful prognostic information.
在治疗膀胱癌患者时,最显著的问题通常涉及高级别非肌层浸润性癌病例,因此迫切需要更好地了解哪些患者将从早期根治性膀胱切除术中获益。泌尿病理学领域正在寻求更便于使用的方法来区分表现出不同临床行为类型的T1期癌症。
经过回顾性分析,我们选择了一组314例行膀胱经尿道切除术(TURB)并被诊断为T1期高级别尿路上皮癌的患者。应用了三种不同的亚分期系统:一种是基于解剖学的T1a/b;另外两种涉及浸润的微米阈值,分别为0.5毫米(如范·莱茵等人所提议)或1毫米(如本研究中所提议)。250例患者接受了早期再次经尿道切除术(reTUR),并将相同的亚分期方法应用于T1期病例。
结果证明,1毫米亚分期系统在100%的病例中可行,范·莱茵系统在100%的病例中可行,基于解剖学的方法(T1a/b)在72.3%的病例中可行。在平均46个月的随访中,接受reTUR的组无复发生存率显著更高(p<0.001),而这三种亚分期系统均不能可靠地预测复发。然而,1毫米作为预测进展的阈值似乎很有前景,在卡普兰-迈耶估计中达到统计学显著性(p<0.04)。
我们的研究表明,在这种情况下微米亚分期是可行的,应扩展至包括任何早期reTUR,以完善首次TURB后所做的亚分期。它还可以提供有用的预后信息。