Home > Journals > Minerva Urology and Nephrology > Past Issues > Minerva Urology and Nephrology 2022 October;74(5) > Minerva Urology and Nephrology 2022 October;74(5):518-27



Publishing options
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian


Publication history
Cite this article as


REVIEW   Free accessfree

Minerva Urology and Nephrology 2022 October;74(5):518-27

DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.22.04659-6


language: English

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in patients undergoing nephroureterectomy for urothelial cancer: a multidisciplinary systematic review and critical analysis

Zhenjie WU 1, Mingmin LI 2, Linhui WANG 1 , Asit PAUL 3, Jay D. RAMAN 4, Andrea NECCHI 5, Sarah P. PSUTKA 6, Carlo BUONERBA 7, Homayoun ZARGAR 8, Peter C. BLACK 9, Ithaar H. DERWEESH 10, Maria C. MIR 11, Robert G. UZZO 12, Savio D. PANDOLFO 13, Riccardo AUTORINO 13, Giuseppe DI LORENZO 14, 15

1 Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China; 2 Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China; 3 Division of Hematology, Oncology and Palliative Care, Department of Internal Medicine, VCU Health, Richmond, VA, USA; 4 Department of Urology, Penn State Health, Hershey, PA, USA; 5 Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; 6 Department of Urology, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; 7 Department of Oncology and Hematology, Regional Reference Center for Rare Tumors, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy; 8 Unit of Surgery, Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; 9 Department of Urologic Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; 10 Department of Urology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; 11 Department of Urology, Valencian Oncology Institute Foundation, FIVO, Valencia, Spain; 12 Division of Urological Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 13 Division of Urology, VCU Health System, Richmond, VA, USA; 14 Unit Oncology, Andrea Tortora Hospital, ASL Salerno, Pagani, Salerno, Italy; 15 Vincenzo Tiberio Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy

INTRODUCTION: The benefit of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) is not yet supported by randomized controlled trials in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), but the evidence is increasing. This narrative systematic review was conducted to evaluate the available evidence on the role of NAST in patients undergoing radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for UTUC.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched for all relevant articles or conference abstracts published and indexed in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus on July 19, 2021. The study was reported according to the PRISMA criteria and designed within the PICOS framework. We included studies comparing patients with non-metastatic UTUC who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or immunotherapy (NAI) with patients who underwent definitive surgery alone or surgery plus adjuvant systemic therapy. Prospective uncontrolled studies were also included.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified 27 reports (NAC, N.=24 and NAI, N.=3) published between 2010 and 2021. Twenty of the 24 studies on NAC were retrospective comparative analyses, whereas the remaining four were prospective single-arm studies. One of the three NAI studies exclusively enrolled patients with UTUC. NAC was associated with improved survival and better pathological response relative to surgery alone, but there was no clear advantage when compared to surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall, the drug-induced toxicity and risk of disease progression were acceptable but the inherent bias across study designs, inadequate reporting and heterogeneous definition of primary outcomes render it difficult to synthesize results, compare centers, and inform practice.
CONCLUSIONS: The current level of evidence supporting NAST for UTUC is relatively low and the inability to predict responsiveness and thereby pinpoint the optimal candidates remains a major challenge. There is a need to compare NAST to adjuvant therapies using clearly defined primary endpoints as minimum reporting standards developed by a multidisciplinary team.

KEY WORDS: Carcinoma, transitional cell; Neoadjuvant therapy; Nephroureterectomy

top of page