| AZ | EN | RU


COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TREATMENT OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER
Musayev T.N.


DOI: 10.61775/2413-3302.v1i43.05


SUMMARY
The aim of the present study was to perform a comparative analysis of long-term oncological outcomes following radical cystectomy (RC) and trimodal therapy (TMT) in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), as well as to develop a prognostic model for predicting recurrence after RC. Material and methods. A total of 359 patients with MIBC were included in the study, of whom 257 underwent RC and 102 received TMT. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan–Meier method, while prognostic factors were assessed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model. Results. In the RC group, the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) rates were 63.1%, 65.3%, and 54.1%, respectively. In the TMT group, the 5-year CSS and OS rates were 33.7% and 31.4%, respectively. The risk of cancer-specific mortality was significantly higher in patients treated with TMT compared with RC (HR=2.37; 95% CI 1.73–3.25; p<0.001). Independent predictors of unfavorable prognosis following RC included tumor stage, lymph node involvement, histological tumor type, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and surgical team experience. Based on these variables, a nomogram predicting 1- and 3-year recurrence-free survival was developed, demonstrating high prognostic accuracy (c-index=0.834). Conclusion. The obtained results confirm the superiority of radical cystectomy as the standard treatment modality for MIBC. Nevertheless, in carefully selected patients with favorable prognostic characteristics, oncological outcomes following TMT were comparable to those observed after RC.
Keywords: bladder cancer, muscle-invasive bladder cancer, radical cystectomy, trimodal therapy, survival, nomogram


REFERENCES
  1. Abudurexiti M, Ma J, Li Y, Hu C, et al. Clinical Outcomes and Prognosis Analysis of Younger Bladder Cancer Patients // Curr Oncol. 2022 Jan 28;29(2):578-588. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29020052.
  2. Advanced Bladder Cancer (ABC) Meta-analysis Collaboration. Adjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data Advanced Bladder Cancer (ABC) Meta-analysis Collaboration // Eur Urol. 2005 Aug;48(2):189-199; discussion 199-201. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.04.005.
  3. AlGizawy SM, Essa HH, Abdel-Wanis ME, Abdel Raheem AM. Trimodality bladder-sparing approach versus radical cystectomy for invasive bladder cancer // Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice. 2014;13(4):428-437. doi:10.1017/S1460396914000107.
  4. Cox D. Regression Models and Life-Tables // J. of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B., - 1972. v. 34, № 2, - p. 187-220. JSTOR 2985181.
  5. Hansen B, Bowers J. Covariate balance in simple, stratified and clustered comparative studies // Statistical Science, - 2008. № 2, - p. 219-236.
  6. Harrell F. Regression modeling strategies with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York: Springer Verlag, - 2001. - 568 p
  7. Fong KY, Lim EJ, Wong HC, Tay KJ, et al. Trimodality therapy versus radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Urol Oncol. 2025 Jul;43(7):412-422. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2025.01.012.
  8. Su X, Dong C, Liao W, Liu W. Oncological effectiveness of bladder-preserving trimodal therapy versus radical cystectomy for the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a system review and meta-analysis // World J Surg Oncol. 2023 Aug 29;21(1):271. doi: 10.1186/s12957-023-03161-z.
  9. Ding H, Fan N, Ning Z, Ma D. Trimodal Therapy vs. Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Meta-Analysis // Front. Oncol. 2020;10:564779. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.564779.
  10. International Bladder Cancer Nomogram Consortium; Bochner BH, Kattan MW, Vora KC. Postoperative nomogram predicting risk of recurrence after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer // J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 20;24(24):3967-72. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.3884.