Comparative real-world survival outcomes of muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with bladder-only vs. whole-pelvis concurrent chemoradiation.

Authors

Carlos Riveros

Carlos Riveros

Department of Urology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX

Carlos Riveros , Sanjana Ranganathan , Waqar Haque , Jiaqiong Xu , Michael Geng , Maryam Anis , Taliah Muhammad , Andrew M. Farach , Bin S. Teh , Christopher J.D. Wallis , Guru P. Sonpavde , Raj Satkunasivam

Organizations

Department of Urology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, Department of Radiation Oncology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, Center for Health Data Science and Analytics, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, Texas A&M University, College of Medicine, Houston, TX, Division of Urology and Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, AdventHealth Cancer Institute, Orlando, FL

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: Elective nodal irradiation for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) undergoing trimodal therapy (TMT) is controversial. In patients with node-negative (N0) MIBC, the benefit of elective whole-pelvis concurrent chemoradiotherapy (WP-CCRT) compared to bladder-only (BO)-CCRT has not been demonstrated. Currently, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines do not recommend whether to include pelvic nodes in the radiation field. Using real-world data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we sought to compare the overall survival (OS) between BO-CCRT and WP-CCRT for MIBC. Methods: Using the 2019 NCDB Participant User File, we identified cases of MIBC diagnosed between 2017 and 2018. We selected patients with clinical T2-T4N0M0 disease receiving TMT as first-line treatment. TMT was defined as transurethral resection of bladder tumor followed by CCRT: 60–65 Gy of RT delivered to the bladder with concurrent single- or multiple-agent chemotherapy. Patients were stratified into BO-CCRT vs. WP-CCRT. Overall survival (OS) analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. The variables included in the multivariable Cox regression model were age, sex, race, comorbidity burden (as per the Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index), facility type, insurance status, median income quartile, rurality, distance from facility, and clinical T stage. Results: A total of 605 patients receiving TMT for MIBC were identified: 162 (26.8%) BO-CCRT and 443 (73.2%) WP-CCRT. The median follow-up time was 25.6 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 4.8-42.6) and 28.7 months (IQR: 3.0-51.6) for BO-CCRT and WP-CCRT, respectively. The median OS was 32.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 30.8 – not reached) and 48.3 months (95% CI 39.6 – not reached) for BO-CCRT and WP-CCRT, respectively. However, multivariable Cox regression analysis failed to find an association between WP-CCRT (hazard ratio [HR] 1.08, 95% CI 0.76-1.54) and improved OS, compared to BO-CCRT. Conclusions: Elective nodal-irradiation (WP-CCRT) in the setting of TMT for MIBC was not associated with a benefit in OS compared to BO-CCRT.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session B: Prostate Cancer and Urothelial Carcinoma

Track

Urothelial Carcinoma,Prostate Cancer - Advanced

Sub Track

Quality of Care/Quality Improvement and Real-World Evidence

Citation

J Clin Oncol 41, 2023 (suppl 6; abstr 488)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2023.41.6_suppl.488

Abstract #

488

Poster Bd #

J10

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Prantik Das

First Author: Ronald Kool

First Author: Ronald Kool