Vetterlein Malte W, Gild Philipp, Kluth Luis A, Seisen Thomas, Gierth Michael, Fritsche Hans-Martin, Burger Maximilian, Protzel Chris, Hakenberg Oliver W, von Landenberg Nicolas, Roghmann Florian, Noldus Joachim, Nuhn Philipp, Pycha Armin, Rink Michael, Chun Felix K-H, May Matthias, Fisch Margit, Aziz Atiqullah
Department of Urology, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Department of Urology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Pierre and Marie Curie University, Paris, France.
BJU Int. 2018 Jan;121(1):101-110. doi: 10.1111/bju.14012. Epub 2017 Oct 11.
To evaluate the effect of peri-operative blood transfusion (PBT) on recurrence-free survival, overall survival, cancer-specific mortality and other-cause mortality in patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC), using a contemporary European multicentre cohort.
The Prospective Multicentre Radical Cystectomy Series (PROMETRICS) includes data on 679 patients who underwent RC at 18 European tertiary care centres in 2011. The association between PBT and oncological survival outcomes was assessed using Kaplan-Meier, Cox regression and competing-risks analyses. Imbalances in clinicopathological features between patients receiving PBT vs those not receiving PBT were mitigated using conventional multivariable adjusting as well as inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).
Overall, 611 patients had complete information on PBT, and 315 (51.6%) received PBT. The two groups (PBT vs no PBT) differed significantly with respect to most clinicopathological features, including peri-operative blood loss: median (interquartile range [IQR]) 1000 (600-1500) mL vs 500 (400-800) mL (P < 0.001). Independent predictors of receipt of PBT in multivariable logistic regression analysis were female gender (odds ratio [OR] 5.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.62-9.71; P < 0.001), body mass index (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95; P < 0.001), type of urinary diversion (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.82; P = 0.013), blood loss (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.23-1.40; P < 0.001), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.37-5.00; P = 0.004), and ≥pT3 tumours (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.02-2.48; P = 0.041). In 531 patients with complete data on survival outcomes, unweighted and unadjusted survival analyses showed worse overall survival, cancer-specific mortality and other-cause mortality rates for patients receiving PBT(P < 0.001, P = 0.017 and P = 0.001, respectively). After IPTW adjustment, those differences no longer held true. PBT was not associated with recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.53-1.58; P = 0.8), overall survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55-2.05; P = 0.9), cancer-specific mortality (sub-HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.62-1.92; P = 0.8) and other-cause mortality (sub-HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.26-3.85; P > 0.9) in IPTW-adjusted Cox regression and competing-risks analyses. The same held true in conventional multivariable Cox and competing-risks analyses, where PBT could not be confirmed as a predictor of any given endpoint (all P values >0.05).
The present results did not show an adverse effect of PBT on oncological outcomes after adjusting for baseline differences in patient characteristics.
采用当代欧洲多中心队列研究,评估围手术期输血(PBT)对接受根治性膀胱切除术(RC)患者的无复发生存率、总生存率、癌症特异性死亡率和其他原因死亡率的影响。
前瞻性多中心根治性膀胱切除术系列研究(PROMETRICS)纳入了2011年在18家欧洲三级医疗中心接受RC治疗的679例患者的数据。采用Kaplan-Meier法、Cox回归分析和竞争风险分析评估PBT与肿瘤生存结局之间的关联。通过传统多变量调整以及治疗权重逆概率法(IPTW)减轻接受PBT与未接受PBT患者之间临床病理特征的不平衡。
总体而言,611例患者有关于PBT的完整信息,其中315例(51.6%)接受了PBT。两组(PBT组与非PBT组)在大多数临床病理特征方面存在显著差异,包括围手术期失血量:中位数(四分位间距[IQR])为1000(600 - 1500)mL 对比500(400 - 800)mL(P < 0.001)。多变量逻辑回归分析中,接受PBT的独立预测因素为女性性别(比值比[OR] 5.05,95%置信区间[CI] 2.62 - 9.71;P < 0.001)、体重指数(OR 0.91,95% CI 0.87 - 0.95;P < 0.001)、尿流改道类型(OR 0.38,95% CI 0.18 - 0.82;P = 0.013)、失血量(OR 1.32,95% CI 1.23 - 1.40;P < 0.001)、新辅助化疗(OR 2.62,95% CI 1.37 - 5.00;P = 0.004)以及≥pT3期肿瘤(OR 1.59,95% CI 1.02 - 2.48;P = 0.041)。在531例有生存结局完整数据的患者中,未加权和未调整的生存分析显示,接受PBT的患者总生存率、癌症特异性死亡率和其他原因死亡率更差(分别为P < 0.001、P = 0.017和P = 0.001)。经过IPTW调整后,这些差异不再成立。在IPTW调整的Cox回归分析和竞争风险分析中,PBT与无复发生存率(风险比[HR] 0.92,95% CI 从0.53至1.58;P = 0.8)、总生存率(HR 1.06,95% CI从0.55至2.05;P = 0.9)、癌症特异性死亡率(子HR 1.09,95% CI从0.62至1.92;P = 0.8)和其他原因死亡率(子HR 1.00,95% CI从0.26至3.85;P > 0.9)均无关联。在传统多变量Cox回归分析和竞争风险分析中也是如此,PBT不能被确认为任何给定终点的预测因素(所有P值>0.05)。
在调整患者特征的基线差异后,本研究结果未显示PBT对肿瘤学结局有不良影响。