Total amount: € 0,00
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,536
Online ISSN 1827-1758
UROTHELIAL CANCER OF THE UPPER URINARY TRACT
Romain MATHIEU 1, 2, Mihai D. VARTOLOMEI 1, 3, Aurélie MBEUTCHA 1, 4, Pierre I. KARAKIEWICZ 5, Alberto BRIGANTI 6, Morgan ROUPRÊT 7, Shahrokh F. SHARIAT 1, 8, 9
1 Department of Urology, Medical University Vienna, General Hospital, Vienna, Austria; 2 Department of Urology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France; 3 Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Targu Mures, Romania; 4 Department of Urology, Hôpital Archet 2, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice, University of Nice Sophia-Antipolis, Nice, France; 5 Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada; 6 Department of Urology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; 7 Academic Department of Urology, La Pitié-Salpetrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Faculté de Médecine Pierre et Marie Curie, University Paris 6, Paris, France; 8 Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA; 9 Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this review was to provide an overview of current biomarkers and risk stratification models in urothelial cancer of the upper urinary tract (UTUC).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A non-systematic Medline/PubMed literature search was performed using the terms “biomarkers”, “preoperative models”, “postoperative models”, “risk stratification”, together with “upper tract urothelial carcinoma”. Original articles published between January 2003 and August 2015 were included based on their clinical relevance. Additional references were collected by cross referencing the bibliography of the selected articles.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Various promising predictive and prognostic biomarkers have been identified in UTUC thanks to the increasing knowledge of the different biological pathways involved in UTUC tumorigenesis. These biomarkers may help identify tumors with aggressive biology and worse outcomes. Current tools aim at predicting muscle invasive or non-organ confined disease, renal failure after radical nephroureterectomy and survival outcomes. These models are still mainly based on imaging and clinicopathological feature and none has integrated biomarkers. Risk stratification in UTUC is still suboptimal, especially in the preoperative setting due to current limitations in staging and grading. Identification of novel biomarkers and external validation of current prognostic models may help improve risk stratification to allow evidence-based counselling for kidney-sparing approaches, perioperative chemotherapy and/or risk-based surveillance.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite growing understanding of the biology underlying UTUC, management of this disease remains difficult due to the lack of validated biomarkers and the limitations of current predictive and prognostic tools. Further efforts and collaborations are necessaryry to allow their integration in daily practice.