Comparative effectiveness of trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for localized muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder

Comparative effectiveness of trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for localized muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder

32nd Annual EAU Congress, 24-28 March 2017, London, United Kingdom 274 Comparative effectiveness of trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for l...

274KB Sizes 0 Downloads 27 Views

32nd Annual EAU Congress, 24-28 March 2017, London, United Kingdom

274

Comparative effectiveness of trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for localized muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder Eur Urol Suppl 2017; 16(3);e476

Seisen T.1, Sun M.1, Lipsitz S.2, Abdollah F.3, Leow J.1, Menon M.3, Von Landenberg N.1, Gild P.1, Rouprêt M.4, Preston M.1, Harshman L.5, Kibel A.S.1, Nguyen P.6, Bellmunt J.5, Choueiri T.5, Trinh Q.-D.1 1

Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Division of Urological Surgery and Center For Surgery and Public Health, Boston, United States of America, 2Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Division of Urological Surgery and Center For, Boston, United States of America, 3 Henry Ford Health System, VUI Center For Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Vattikuti Urology Institute, Detroit, United States of America, 4Pitié-Salpêtrière, APHP, University Paris VI, Dept. of Urology, Paris, France, 5Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Dept. of Medical Oncology, Boston, United States of America, 6Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Boston, United States of America INTRODUCTION & OBJECTIVES: The only randomized controlled trial comparing trimodal therapy (TMT) vs. radical cystectomy (RC) for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB) failed to meet its accrual target. We sought to examine the comparative effectiveness of TMT vs. RC for muscle-invasive UCB in an observational cohort study. MATERIAL & METHODS: Within the National Cancer Data Base (2004-2011), we identified 12,843 individuals who received TMT or RC for definitive treatment of cN0M0 muscle-invasive UCB. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) adjusted Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses with timevarying covariate were used to compare overall survival (OS) of patients who received TMT vs. RC. Exploratory analyses according to patient characteristics were also performed. RESULTS: Overall, 1,257 (9.8%) and 11,586 (90.2%) patients received TMT and RC, respectively. IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves showed that median OS was similar between TMT and RC groups (39.6 [95% CI, 33.7-45.5] vs. 43.0 [95% CI, 40.9-45.1] months; P=0.290; Figure 1). In IPTW-adjusted Cox regression analysis with time-varying covariate, TMT was associated with a significant adverse effect on OS after 25 months of follow-up (HR=1.37;95%CI=[1.16-1.59];P<0.001). In exploratory analyses (Figure 2), there was no significant difference between TMT and RC with regard to long-term OS in individuals aged ≥70 (HR=1.21;95%CI=[0.83-1.60];P=0.225), of female gender (HR=1.28;95%CI=[0.83-1.74];P=0.170), with Charlson comorbidity index≥1 (HR=1.10;95%CI=[0.83-1.38];P=0.439) and/or ≥cT3 disease (HR=1.16; 95%CI=[0.80-1.52];P=0.338).

Eur Urol Suppl 2017; 16(3);e476

32nd Annual EAU Congress, 24-28 March 2017, London, United Kingdom

274

Comparative effectiveness of trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for localized muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder Eur Urol Suppl 2017; 16(3);e477

Eur Urol Suppl 2017; 16(3);e477

32nd Annual EAU Congress, 24-28 March 2017, London, United Kingdom

274

Comparative effectiveness of trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for localized muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder Eur Urol Suppl 2017; 16(3);e478

CONCLUSIONS: We generally observed that TMT was associated with worse long-term OS compared to RC for muscle-invasive UCB. However, selected subgroups of patients may choose TMT over RC to avoid surgical toxicities with minimal impact on OS.

Eur Urol Suppl 2017; 16(3);e478 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)