Preview

Cancer Urology

Advanced search

Comparison of the EORTC and CUETO prognostic models in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer

https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2018-14-2-162-170

Abstract

Bladder cancer is one of the most common malignant diseases involving the urinary system. Accurate prediction of the disease course and outcome is crucial for choosing an appropriate treatment strategy in these patients. Currently, there are several prognostic models for predicting non-muscle invasive bladder cancer outcomes. The scoring systems developed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the Spanish Urological Club for Oncological Treatment (CUETO) are the most widely used prognostic models for bladder cancer. Despite the undeniable merits of these scales, they need to be supplemented. Since the prognostic score has a direct impact on the treatment strategy, intensity and costs of postoperative follow-up, and outcome, its accuracy should be higher than it is now. Identifying the additional parameters that would increase the robustness of these models is one of the major challenges for researchers.

The molecular and genetic characteristics of the tumor, that can be estimated after the first surgery, are probably the best candidates for this role. The main limitation of these prognostic models lies in the fact that they assess only morphological properties of the tumor, while the most important molecular characteristics are neglected. These scoring systems do not evaluate clinical factors, concomitant diseases, and iatrogenic complications occurring during the treatment of relapses. The assessment of molecular mechanisms and clinical characteristics underlying the development of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer as well as identification of key molecular markers, that could complement the currently existing risk assessment models, are the most important goals for researchers dealing with bladder cancer. It will significantly improve predictive capabilities of these models, ensuring the choice of an optimal treatment strategy.

About the Authors

A. D. Kaprin
National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
3 2nd Botkinskiy Proezd, Moscow 125284
Competing Interests:

 



O. I. Apolikhin
N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Build. 4, 51 3rd Parkovaya St., Moscow 105425


B. Ya. Alekseev
National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
3 2nd Botkinskiy Proezd, Moscow 125284


D. A. Roshchin
N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Build. 4, 51 3rd Parkovaya St., Moscow 105425


A. A. Kachmazov
N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Build. 4, 51 3rd Parkovaya St., Moscow 105425


D. V. Perepechin
N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Build. 4, 51 3rd Parkovaya St., Moscow 105425


M. P. Golovashchenko
P.A. Hertzen Moscow Oncology Research Institute – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
3 2nd Botkinskiy Proezd, Moscow 125284


D. M. Deryagina
N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Build. 4, 51 3rd Parkovaya St., Moscow 105425


References

1. Ferlay J., Shin H.R., Bray F. et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 2010;127(12):2893–917. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25516. PMID: 21351269.

2. Babjuk M., Burger M., Zigeuner R. et al. EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2013. Eur Urol 2013;64(4):639–53. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.06.003. PMID: 23827737.

3. Kirkali Z., Chan T., Manoharan M. et al. Bladder cancer: epidemiology, staging and grading, and diagnosis. Urology 2005;66(6 Suppl 1):4–34. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.07.062. PMID: 16399414.

4. Sylvester R.J., van der Meijden A.P., Oosterlinck W. et al. Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol 2006;49(3):466–75. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.031. PMID: 16442208.

5. Babjuk M., Oosterlinck W., Sylvester R.J. et al. EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, the 2011 update. Eur Urol 2011;59(6):997–1008. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.017. PMID: 21458150.

6. Power N.E., Izawa J. Comparison of Guidelines on Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer (EAU, CUA, AUA, NCCN, NICE). Bladder Cancer 2016;2(1):27–36. DOI: 10.3233/BLC-150034. PMID: 27376122.

7. Hall M.C., Chang S.S., Dalbagni G. et al. Guideline for the management of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (stages Ta, T1, and Tis): 2007 update. J Urol 2007;178(6):2314–30. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.003. PMID: 17993339.

8. Rosenbaum R.S., Park M.C., Fleischmann J. Intravesical bacille Calmette–Guérin therapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer. Urology 1996;47(2):208–11. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80418-X. PMID: 8607236.

9. Sugiura S., Noto N., Koizumi M. et al. Post-operative single immediate intravesical instillation chemotherapy as prophylaxis for reccurence after transurethral resection of low risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Hinyokika Kiyo 2017;63(5):183–7. PMID: 28625024.

10. Sylvester R.J., Oosterlinck W., van der Meijden A.P. A single immediate postoperative instillation of chemotherapy decreases the risk of recurrence in patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer: a metaanalysis of published results of randomized clinical trials. J Urol 2004;171(6): 2186–90. PMID: 15126782.

11. Sylvester R.J., Oosterlinck W., Witjes J.A. The schedule and duration of intravesical chemotherapy in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review of the published results of randomized clinical trials. Eur Urol 2008;53(4):709–19. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.01.015. PMID: 18207317.

12. Kurth K.H., Denis L., Bouffioux C. et al. Factors affecting recurrence and progression in superficial bladder tumours. Eur J Cancer 1995;31A(11):1840–6. PMID: 8541110.

13. Solsona E., Iborra I., Dumont R. et al. The 3-month clinical response to intravesical therapy as a predictive factor for progression in patients with high risk superficial bladder cancer. J Urol 2000; 164(3 Pt 1):685–9. PMID: 10953125.

14. Herr H.W., Sogani P.C. Does early cystectomy improve the survival of patients with high risk superficial bladder tumors? J Urol 2001;166(4):1296–9. PMID: 11547061.

15. Fernandez-Gomez J., Madero R., Solsona E. et al. Predicting non-muscle invasive bladder cancer recurrence and progression in patients treated with bacillus Calmette– Guerin: the CUETO scoring model. J Urol 2009;182(5):2195–203. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.10.006. PMID: 17950987.

16. Fernandez-Gomez J., Solsona E., Unda M. et al. Prognostic factors in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with bacillus Calmette–Guérin: multivariate analysis of data from four randomized CUETO trials. Eur Urol 2008;53(5):992–1001. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.10.006. PMID: 17950987.

17. Han R.F., Pan J.G. Can intravesical bacillus Calmette–Guérin reduce recurrence in patients with superficial bladder cancer? A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Urology 2006;67(6):1216–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.12.014. PMID: 16765182.

18. Sylvester R.J., van der Meijden A.P., Lamm D.L. Intravesical bacillus Calmette–Guerin reduces the risk of progression in patients with superficial bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of the published results of randomized clinical trials. J Urol 2002;168(5):1964–70 DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000034450.80198.1c. PMID: 12394686.

19. Bazarbashi S.N., Azouz H.J., Abu Sabaa A.H. et al. Recurrence and progression in nonmuscle invasive transitional cell carcinoma of urinary bladder treated with intravesical Bacillus Calmette–Guerin: a single center experience and analysis of prognostic factors. Urol Ann 2016;8(3):333–7. DOI: 10.4103/0974-7796.184891. PMID: 27453656.

20. Böhle A., Bock P.R. Intravesical bacille Calmette–Guérin versus mitomycin C in superficial bladder cancer: formal metaanalysis of comparative studies on tumor progression. Urology 2004;63(4):682–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2003.11.049. PMID: 15072879.

21. Shelley M.D., Mason M.D., Kynaston H. Intravesical therapy for superficial bladder cancer: a systematic review of randomised trials and meta-analyses. Cancer Treat Rev 2010;36(3):195–205. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2009.12.005. PMID: 20079574.

22. Ajili F., Darouiche A., Chebil M., Boubaker S. The efficiency of the EORTC scoring system for the prediction of recurrence and progression of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated by bacillus Calmette–Guerin immunotherapy. Ultrastruct Pathol 2013;37(4):249–53. DOI: 10.3109/01913123.2013.786772. PMID: 23899093.

23. Fernandez-Gomez J., Madero R., Solsona E. et al. The EORTC tables overestimate the risk of recurrence and progression in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with bacillus Calmette–Guérin: external validation of the EORTC risk tables. Eur Urol 2011;60(3):423–30. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.033. PMID: 21621906.

24. Böhle A. Editorial comment: intravesical bacillus Calmette–Guerin reduces the risk of progression in patients with superficial bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of the published results of randomized clinical trials. Int Braz J Urol 2002;28(6):585–6. PMID: 15748421.

25. Sylvester R.J., van der Meijden A.P., Witjes J.A., Kurth K. Bacillus Calmette– Guerin versus chemotherapy for the intravesical treatment of patients with carcinoma in situ of the bladder: a meta-analysis of the published results of randomized clinical trials. J Urol 2005;174(1):86–91. PMID: 15947584.

26. Malmström P.U., Sylvester R.J., Crawford D.E. et al. An individual patient data meta-analysis of the long-term outcome of randomised studies comparing intravesical mitomycin C versus bacillus Calmette– Guérin for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Eur Urol 2009;56(2):247–56. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.04.038. PMID: 19409692.

27. Kaasinen E., Wijkström H., Rintala E. et al. Seventeen-year follow-up of the prospective randomized Nordic CIS study: BCG monotherapy versus alternating therapy with mitomycin C and BCG in patients with carcinoma in situ of the urinary bladder. Scand J Urol 2016;50(5):360–8. DOI: 10.1080/21681805.2016.1210672. PMID: 27603424.

28. Spencer B.A., McBride R.B., Hershman D.L. et al. Adjuvant intravesical bacillus Calmette–Guérin therapy and survival among elderly patients with non-muscleinvasive bladder cancer. J Oncol Pract 2013;9(2):92–8. DOI: 10.1200/JOP.2011.000480. PMID: 23814517.

29. Xu T., Zhu Z., Zhang X. et al. Predicting recurrence and progression in Chinese patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer using EORTC and CUETO scoring models. Urology 2013;82(2):387–93. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.04.007. PMID: 23759377.

30. Xylinas E., Kent M., Kluth L. et al. Accuracy of the EORTC risk tables and of the CUETO scoring model to predict outcomes in non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Br J Cancer 2013;109(6):1460–6. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.372. PMID: 23982601.

31. Choi S.Y., Ryu J.H., Chang I.H. et al. Predicting recurrence and progression of nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer in Korean patients: a comparison of the EORTC and CUETO models. Korean J Urol 2014;55(10):643–9. DOI: 10.4111 kju.2014.55.10.643. PMID: 25324946.

32. Ravvaz K., Walz M.E., Weissert J.A., Downs Т.М. Predicting non-muscle invasive bladder cancer recurrence and progression in a united states population. J Urol 2017;S0022–5347(17):54785–0. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.04.077. PMID: 28433642.

33. Vedder M.M., Márquez M., de BekkerGrob E.W. et al. Risk prediction scores for recurrence and progression of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: an international validation in primary tumours. PLoS One 2014;9(6):e96849. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096849. PMID: 24905984.


Review

For citations:


Kaprin A.D., Apolikhin O.I., Alekseev B.Ya., Roshchin D.A., Kachmazov A.A., Perepechin D.V., Golovashchenko M.P., Deryagina D.M. Comparison of the EORTC and CUETO prognostic models in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Cancer Urology. 2018;14(2):162-170. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2018-14-2-162-170

Views: 1009


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1726-9776 (Print)
ISSN 1996-1812 (Online)
X