Role of clinicopathological variables in predicting recurrence and survival outcomes after surgery for non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents 2% of all diagnosed malignancies worldwide, with disease recurrence affecting 20% to 40% of patients. Existing prognostic recurrence models based on clinicopathological features continue to be a subject of controversy. In this meta-analysis, we summarized research findings that explored the correlation between clinicopathological characteristics and post-surgery survival outcomes in non-metastatic RCC patients. Our analysis incorporates 99 publications spanning 140 568 patients. The study's main findings indicate that the following clinicopathological characteristics were associated with unfavorable survival outcomes: T stage, tumor grade, tumor size, lymph node involvement, tumor necrosis, sarcomatoid features, positive surgical margins (PSM), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), early recurrence, constitutional symptoms, poor performance status (PS), low hemoglobin level, high body-mass index (BMI), diabetes mellitus (DM) and hypertension. All of which emerged as predictors for poor recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival. Clear cell (CC) subtype, urinary collecting system invasion (UCSI), capsular penetration, perinephric fat invasion, renal vein invasion (RVI) and increased C-reactive protein (CRP) were all associated with poor RFS. In contrast, age, sex, tumor laterality, nephrectomy type and approach had no impact on survival outcomes. As part of an additional analysis, we attempted to assess the association between these characteristics and late recurrences (relapses occurring more than 5 years after surgery). Nevertheless, we did not find any prediction capabilities for late disease recurrences among any of the features examined. Our findings highlight the prognostic significance of various clinicopathological characteristics potentially aiding in the identification of high-risk RCC patients and enhancing the development of more precise prediction models.

Updated systematic review and network meta-analysis of first-line treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma with extended follow-up data.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapies are the recommended first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, no head-to-head phase-3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of different ICI-based combination therapies. Here, we compared the efficacy of various first-line ICI-based combination therapies in patients with mRCC using updated survival data from phase-3 RCTs. Three databases were searched in June 2023 for RCTs that analyzed oncologic outcomes in mRCC patients treated with ICI-based combination therapies as first-line treatment. A network meta-analysis compared outcomes including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and complete response (CR) rate. Subgroup analyses were based on the International mRCC Database Consortium risk classification. The treatment ranking analysis of the entire cohort showed that nivolumab + cabozantinib (81%) had the highest likelihood of improving OS, followed by nivolumab + ipilimumab (75%); pembrolizumab + lenvatinib had the highest likelihood of improving PFS (99%), ORR (97%), and CR (86%). These results remained valid even when the analysis was limited to patients with intermediate/poor risk, except that nivolumab + ipilimumab had the highest likelihood of achieving CR (100%). Further, OS benefits of ICI doublets were not inferior to those of ICI + tyrosine kinase inhibitor combinations. Recommendation of combination therapies with ICIs and/or tyrosine kinase inhibitors based on survival benefits and patient pretreatment risk classification will help advance personalized medicine for mRCC.

First-line immunotherapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an updated network meta-analysis including triplet therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the differential efficacy of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combined therapies among patients with intermediate- and poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), as recently, the efficacy of triplet therapy comprising nivolumab plus ipilimumab plus cabozantinib has been published. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three databases were searched in December 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) analysing oncological outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with first-line ICI-based combined therapies. We performed network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rates (ORRs), in patients with intermediate- and poor-risk mRCC; we also assessed treatment-related adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, seven RCTs were included in the meta-analyses and NMAs. Treatment ranking analysis revealed that pembrolizumab + lenvatinib (99%) had the highest likelihood of improved PFS, followed by nivolumab + cabozantinib (79%), and nivolumab + ipilimumab + cabozantinib (77%). Notably, compared to nivolumab + cabozantinib, adding ipilimumab to nivolumab + cabozantinib did not improve PFS (hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.43). Regarding ORRs, treatment ranking analysis also revealed that pembrolizumab + lenvatinib had the highest likelihood of providing better ORRs (99.7%). The likelihoods of improved PFS and ORRs of pembrolizumab + lenvatinib were true in both International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses confirmed the robust efficacy of pembrolizumab + lenvatinib as first-line treatment for patients with intermediate or poor IMDC risk mRCC. Triplet therapy did not result in superior efficacy. Considering both toxicity and the lack of mature overall survival data, triplet therapy should only be considered in selected patients.

Urinary function in female patients after traditional, organ-sparing and nerve-sparing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a systematic review and pooled analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine and summarize the available data on urinary, sexual, and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) outcomes after traditional radical cystectomy (RC), reproductive organ-preserving RC (ROPRC) and nerve-sparing RC (NSRC) for bladder cancer (BCa) in female patients. METHODS: The PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases were searched to identify studies reporting functional outcomes in female patients undergoing RC and urinary diversion for the treatment of BCa. The outcomes of interest were voiding function (for orthotopic neobladder [ONB]), sexual function and HRQOL. The following independent variables were derived and included in the meta-analysis: pooled rate of daytime and nighttime continence/incontinence, and intermittent self-catheterization (ISC) rates. Analyses were performed separately for traditional, organ- and/or nerve-sparing surgical approaches. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies comprising 2740 female patients (1201 traditional RC and 1539 organ-/nerve-sparing RC, and 264 nerve-sparing-alone RC) were eligible for qualitative synthesis; 44 studies comprising 2418 female patients were included in the quantitative synthesis. In women with ONB diversion, the pooled rates of daytime continence after traditional RC, ROPRC and NSRC were 75.2%, 79.3% and 71.2%, respectively. The pooled rate of nighttime continence after traditional RC was 59.5%; this rate increased to 70.7% and 71.7% in women who underwent ROPRC and NSRC, respectively. The pooled rate of ISC after traditional RC with ONB diversion in female patients was 27.6% and decreased to 20.6% and 16.8% in patients undergoing ROPRC and NSRC, respectively. The use of different definitions and questionnaires in the assessment of postoperative sexual and HRQOL outcomes did not allow a systematic comparison. CONCLUSIONS: Female organ- and nerve-sparing surgical approaches during RC seem to result in improved voiding function. There is a significant need for well-designed studies exploring sexual and HRQOL outcomes to establish evidence-based management strategies to support a shared decision-making process tailored towards patient expectations and satisfaction. Understanding expected functional, sexual and quality-of-life outcomes is necessary to allow individualized pre- and postoperative counselling and care delivery in female patients planned to undergo RC.

Efficacy of Systemic Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients With Visceral Metastasis: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Network Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: There are limited pooled data showing the impact of visceral metastasis on oncologic outcomes in metastatic prostate cancer patients treated with combination systemic therapies. We aimed to analyze and compare the efficacy of combination systemic therapies in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with or without visceral metastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three databases were queried in July 2022 for randomized, controlled trials analyzing metastatic prostate cancer patients treated with combination systemic therapy (androgen receptor signaling inhibitor and/or docetaxel plus androgen deprivation therapy) to standard of care. We analyzed the association between presence of visceral metastases and efficacy of systemic therapies in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. The main and secondary outcomes of interest were overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. Formal meta-analysis using fixed-effect model and network meta-analysis using random-effect model were conducted. We followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) and AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 12 and 8 randomized, controlled trials were included for systematic review and meta-analyses/network meta-analyses, respectively. In metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients, adding androgen receptor signaling inhibitor to standard of care improved overall survival in patients with visceral metastasis (pooled HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.94) as well as in those without (pooled HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.60-0.72; no differences in both across- and within-trial approach; P = .13 and P = .06, respectively). On the other hand, the progression-free survival benefit from androgen receptor signaling inhibitor + androgen deprivation therapy was significantly lower in patients with visceral metastasis using across-trial approach (P = .03), while it did not reach statistical significance using within-trial approach (P = .14). Analysis of treatment ranking in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer showed that darolutamide + docetaxel + androgen deprivation therapy had the highest likelihood of improved overall survival irrespective of visceral metastasis. In post-docetaxel metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients, adding androgen receptor signaling inhibitor to androgen deprivation therapy significantly improved overall survival in both patients with visceral metastasis (pooled HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.63-0.98) and those without (pooled HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.55-0.72). No randomized, controlled trials reported the differential oncologic outcomes stratified by lung vs liver metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Despite aggressive clinical behavior and worse trajectory of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with visceral metastasis, the effectiveness of novel systemic therapies is similar in both metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with and without visceral metastasis. Further well-designed studies with detailed visceral metastatic sites and number will enrich the clinical decision-making.

Iatrogenic ureteric injury during abdominal or pelvic surgery: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of ureteric injuries, clinical value of prophylactic ureteric stenting and impact of intra- or postoperative detection of ureteric injuries in patients treated with gynaecological or colorectal surgery. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for articles published before September 2021 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. Studies were deemed eligible if they evaluated the differences in the rate of ureteric injuries between laparoscopic and open surgery, prophylactic ureteric stenting or not, and those of final treatment success between intra- and postoperative detection in patients who underwent gynaecological or colorectal surgery. RESULTS: Overall, 46 studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Compared to open surgery, laparoscopic hysterectomy was associated with a higher incidence of ureteric injuries (pooled odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71-2.62), but there was no statistically significant difference in colectomy (pooled OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77-1.03). Prophylactic ureteric stenting was associated with a lower incidence of ureteric injuries during gynaecological surgery (pooled OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.96). The number needed to perform ureteric stenting to prevent one ureteric injury was 224 in gynaecological surgery. On the other hand, prophylactic ureteric stenting did not reduce the risk of ureteric injuries during colorectal surgery. Intraoperative detection of a ureteric injury was associated with a lower rate of complication management failure compared to postoperative detection (pooled OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.12-0.41). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic hysterectomy seems to be associated with a higher rate of ureteric injuries compared to an open approach. Prophylactic ureteric stenting seems to reduce this risk during gynaecological surgery. Intraoperative detection of a ureteric injury during abdominal/pelvic surgery improves outcomes, suggesting the need for awareness and proactive problem identification. Further well-designed studies assessing the candidates who are more likely to benefit from prophylactic ureteric stenting including cost analysis are needed.

Role of pelvic drain and timing of urethral catheter removal following RARP: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical value of routine pelvic drain (PD) placement and early removal of urethral catheter (UC) in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), as perioperative management such as the necessity of PD or optimal timing for UC removal remains highly variable. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for articles published before March 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies were deemed eligible if they investigated the differential rate of postoperative complications between patients with/without routine PD placement and with/without early UC removal, defined as UC removal at 2-4 days after RARP. RESULTS: Overall, eight studies comprising 5112 patients were eligible for the analysis of PD placement, and six studies comprising 2598 patients were eligible for the analysis of UC removal. There were no differences in the rate of any complications (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.00), severe complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥III; pooled OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.54-1.69), all and/or symptomatic lymphocele (pooled OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.50-1.33; and pooled OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.26-1.29, respectively) between patients with or without routine PD placement. Furthermore, avoiding PD placement decreased the rate of postoperative ileus (pooled OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51-0.91). Early removal of UC resulted in an increased likelihood of urinary retention (OR 6.21, 95% CI 3.54-10.9) in retrospective, but not in prospective studies. There were no differences in anastomosis leakage and early continence rates between patients with or those without early removal of UC. CONCLUSIONS: There is no benefit for routine PD placement after standard RARP in the published articles. Early removal of UC seems possible with the caveat of the increased risk of urinary retention, while the effect on medium-term continence is still unclear. These data may help guide the standardisation of postoperative procedures by avoiding unnecessary interventions, thereby reducing potential complications and associated costs.

Oncological impact of cystoscopic findings in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between cystoscopic findings and oncological outcomes in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) given that the oncological impact of quantity and quality assessment of tumours with cystoscopy has not been well verified. METHODS: Multiple databases were queried in May 2022 for studies investigating the association of oncological outcomes, such as recurrence-free (RFS), progression-free (PFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS), with cystoscopic findings, including multiplicity, size, and gross appearance of tumours in patients with NMIBC. RESULTS: Overall, 73 studies comprising 28 139 patients were eligible for the meta-analysis. Tumour multiplicity was associated with worse RFS (pooled hazard ratio [HR] 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-1.74) and PFS (pooled HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.18-1.76) in NMIBC patients (including both Ta and T1). Tumour size (≥3 cm) was associated with worse RFS (pooled HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.69-2.30) and PFS (pooled HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.52-2.15) in NMIBC patients. In patients with T1 bladder cancer (BCa), tumour multiplicity and size (≥3 cm) were also associated with worse RFS, PFS and CSS. By contrast, among patients treated with bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), tumour multiplicity was not associated with worse RFS, and tumour size (≥3 cm) was not associated with worse PFS. Sessile tumours were associated with worse RFS (pooled HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.52-3.01) and PFS (pooled HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.42-3.32) compared to pedunculated tumours. Compared to papillary tumours, solid tumours were associated with worse RFS (pooled HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.25-2.72) and PFS (pooled HR 3.06, 95% CI 2.31-4.07) in NMIBC patients, and CSS in T1 BCa patients (pooled HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.63-3.30). CONCLUSIONS: Cystoscopic findings, including tumour multiplicity, size, and gross appearance, strongly predict oncological outcomes in NMIBC patients. Cystoscopic visual features can help in the decision-making process regarding the timeliness and extent of tumour resection as well as future management such as intravesical therapy.

Impact of performance status on efficacy of systemic therapy for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of systemic therapies in patients with worse performance status (PS) treated for high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa (mHSPC), and non-metastatic/metastatic castration-resistant PCa (nmCRPC/mCRPC), as there is sparse pooled data showing the effect of PS on oncological outcomes in patients with PCa. METHODS: Three databases were queried in June 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) analysing patients with PCa treated with systemic therapy (i.e., adding androgen receptor signalling inhibitor [ARSI] or docetaxel [DOC] to androgen-deprivation therapy [ADT]). We analysed the oncological outcomes of patients with PCa with worse PS, defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS ≥ 1, treated with combination therapies and compared these to patients with good PS. The main outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and progression-free survival. RESULTS: Overall, 25 and 18 RCTs were included for systematic review and meta-analyses/network meta-analyses, respectively. In all clinical settings, combination systemic therapies significantly improved OS in patients with worse PS as well as in those with good PS, while the MFS benefit from ARSI in the nmCRPC setting was more pronounced in patients with good PS than in those with worse PS (P = 0.002). Analysis of treatment ranking in patients with mHSPC revealed that triplet therapy had the highest likelihood of improved OS irrespective of PS; specifically, adding darolutamide to DOC + ADT had the highest likelihood of improved OS in patients with worse PS. Analyses were limited by the small proportion of patients with a PS ≥ 1 (19%-28%) and that the number of PS 2 was rarely reported. CONCLUSIONS: Among RCTs, novel systemic therapies seem to benefit the OS of patients with PCa irrespective of PS. Our findings suggest that worse PS should not discourage treatment intensification across all disease stages.

Impact of sex on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in kidney and urothelial cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To analyze and summarize the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) alone or in combination therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and urothelial carcinoma (UC) stratified by sex. METHODS: Three databases were queried in October 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing RCC and UC patients treated with ICIs. We analyzed the association between sex and the efficacy of ICIs in RCC and UC patients across several clinical settings. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival for the metastatic setting and disease-free survival (DFS) for the adjuvant setting. RESULTS: Overall, 16 RCTs were included for meta-analyses and network meta-analyses. In the first-line treatment of metastatic RCC (mRCC) and UC (mUC) patients, ICI-based combination therapies significantly improved OS compared to the current standard of care, regardless of sex. Adjuvant ICI monotherapy reduced the risk of disease recurrence in female patients with locally advanced RCC (pooled hazard ratio [HR]: 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.93) but not in male patients, and, conversely, in male patients with muscle-invasive UC (pooled HR: 0.80, 95%CI 0.68-0.94) but not in female patients. Treatment ranking analyses in the first-line treatment of mRCC and mUC showed different results between sexes. Of note, regarding adjuvant treatment for RCC, pembrolizumab (99%) had the highest likelihood of improved DFS in males, whereas atezolizumab (84%) in females. CONCLUSIONS: OS benefit of first-line ICI-based combination therapy was seen in mRCC and mUC patients regardless of sex. Sex-based recommendations for ICI-based regimens according to the clinical setting may help guide clinical decision-making.