Department of Urology, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Department of Urology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
PLoS One. 2022 Apr 21;17(4):e0267410. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267410. eCollection 2022.
In the context of the COVID-19 outbreak, the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines Rapid Reaction Group provided recommendations to manage muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) based on priority levels: neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) should be avoided for patients with T2-3N0M0 MIBC. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy of NAC compared with radical cystectomy (RC) alone in improving the overall survival (OS) of patients with T2-4aN0M0 MIBC.
A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The primary outcome was OS of patients with T2-4aN0M0 MIBC, and the secondary outcome was OS of patients with only T2N0M0 MIBC.
Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, the quality of all studies was relatively high, and little publication bias was demonstrated. The OS was significantly better in the NAC with RC group than in RC alone (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.92; p = 0.002). A subgroup analysis was performed on only patients with T2N0M0 MIBC, and five studies were included. There was no difference in the OS between the NAC with RC and the RC alone groups (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-1.01 p = 0.06).
As recommended by the EAU guidelines Rapid Reaction Group, patients with T2N0M0 MIBC should strongly consider omitting NAC until the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. Whether to omit NAC in T3-4aN0M0 MIBC needs further discussion, and studies targeting only T2-3N0M0 MIBC are expected to proceed further.
在 COVID-19 大流行背景下,欧洲泌尿外科学会(EAU)指南快速反应小组根据优先级水平为肌层浸润性膀胱癌(MIBC)的管理提供了建议:T2-3N0M0 MIBC 患者应避免新辅助化疗(NAC)。本荟萃分析旨在评估 NAC 与单纯根治性膀胱切除术(RC)相比,改善 T2-4aN0M0 MIBC 患者总生存(OS)的疗效。
根据 PRISMA 指南进行系统评价。检索 PubMed/Medline、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库。主要结局为 T2-4aN0M0 MIBC 患者的 OS,次要结局为仅 T2N0M0 MIBC 患者的 OS。
本荟萃分析纳入 8 项研究。总体而言,所有研究的质量都相对较高,且显示出较小的发表偏倚。与 RC 组相比,NAC+RC 组的 OS 显著更好(HR,0.79;95%CI,0.68-0.92;p=0.002)。仅对 T2N0M0 MIBC 患者进行了亚组分析,纳入了 5 项研究。NAC+RC 组与 RC 组的 OS 无差异(HR,0.83;95%CI,0.69-1.01;p=0.06)。
按照 EAU 指南快速反应小组的建议,T2N0M0 MIBC 患者强烈考虑在 COVID-19 大流行结束前不使用 NAC。T3-4aN0M0 MIBC 是否省略 NAC 仍需进一步讨论,预计仅针对 T2-3N0M0 MIBC 的研究将进一步开展。