Cargando…
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend assessing the prognosis in high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients (UTUC) after surgery. However, no specific method is endorsed. Among the various prognostic models, nomograms represent an easy and accurate tool to predict the individual probabil...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9283688/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35847838 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.907975 |
_version_ | 1784747380230324224 |
---|---|
author | Pallauf, Maximilian König, Frederik D’Andrea, David Laukhtina, Ekaterina Mostafaei, Hadi Motlagh, Reza Sari Quhal, Fahad Aydh, Abdulmajeed Yanagisawa, Takafumi Kawada, Tatsushi Rajwa, Pawel Lusuardi, Lukas Soria, Francesco Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Rouprêt, Morgan Rink, Michael Lotan, Yair Margulis, Vitaly Singla, Nirmish Xylinas, Evanguelos Shariat, Shahrokh F. Pradere, Benjamin |
author_facet | Pallauf, Maximilian König, Frederik D’Andrea, David Laukhtina, Ekaterina Mostafaei, Hadi Motlagh, Reza Sari Quhal, Fahad Aydh, Abdulmajeed Yanagisawa, Takafumi Kawada, Tatsushi Rajwa, Pawel Lusuardi, Lukas Soria, Francesco Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Rouprêt, Morgan Rink, Michael Lotan, Yair Margulis, Vitaly Singla, Nirmish Xylinas, Evanguelos Shariat, Shahrokh F. Pradere, Benjamin |
author_sort | Pallauf, Maximilian |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend assessing the prognosis in high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients (UTUC) after surgery. However, no specific method is endorsed. Among the various prognostic models, nomograms represent an easy and accurate tool to predict the individual probability for a specific event. Therefore, identifying the best-suited nomogram for each setting seems of great interest to the patient and provider. OBJECTIVES: To identify, summarize and compare postoperative UTUC nomograms predicting oncologic outcomes. To estimate the overall performance of the nomograms and identify the most reliable predictors. To create a reference tool for postoperative UTUC nomograms, physicians can use in clinical practice. DESIGN: A systematic review was conducted following the recommendations of Cochrane’s Prognosis Methods Group. Medline and EMBASE databases were searched for studies published before December 2021. Nomograms were grouped according to outcome measurements, the purpose of use, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to estimate nomogram group performance and predictor reliability. Reference tables summarizing the nomograms’ important characteristics were created. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 26 nomograms. Only four were externally validated. Study heterogeneity was significant, and the overall Risk of Bias (RoB) was high. Nomogram groups predicting overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and intravesical recurrence (IVR) had moderate discrimination accuracy (c-Index summary estimate with 95% confidence interval [95% CI] and prediction interval [PI] > 0.6). Nomogram groups predicting cancer-specific survival (CSS) had good discrimination accuracy (c-Index summary estimate with 95% CI and PI > 0.7). Advanced pathological tumor stage (≥ pT3) was the most reliable predictor of OS. Pathological tumor stage (≥ pT2), age, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were the most reliable predictors of CSS. LVI was the most reliable predictor of RFS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a moderate to good discrimination accuracy, severe heterogeneity discourages the uninformed use of postoperative prognostic UTUC nomograms. For nomograms to become of value in a generalizable population, future research must invest in external validation and assessment of clinical utility. Meanwhile, this systematic review serves as a reference tool for physicians choosing nomograms based on individual needs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=282596, identifier PROSPERO [CRD42021282596]. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9283688 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92836882022-07-16 A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery Pallauf, Maximilian König, Frederik D’Andrea, David Laukhtina, Ekaterina Mostafaei, Hadi Motlagh, Reza Sari Quhal, Fahad Aydh, Abdulmajeed Yanagisawa, Takafumi Kawada, Tatsushi Rajwa, Pawel Lusuardi, Lukas Soria, Francesco Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Rouprêt, Morgan Rink, Michael Lotan, Yair Margulis, Vitaly Singla, Nirmish Xylinas, Evanguelos Shariat, Shahrokh F. Pradere, Benjamin Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend assessing the prognosis in high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients (UTUC) after surgery. However, no specific method is endorsed. Among the various prognostic models, nomograms represent an easy and accurate tool to predict the individual probability for a specific event. Therefore, identifying the best-suited nomogram for each setting seems of great interest to the patient and provider. OBJECTIVES: To identify, summarize and compare postoperative UTUC nomograms predicting oncologic outcomes. To estimate the overall performance of the nomograms and identify the most reliable predictors. To create a reference tool for postoperative UTUC nomograms, physicians can use in clinical practice. DESIGN: A systematic review was conducted following the recommendations of Cochrane’s Prognosis Methods Group. Medline and EMBASE databases were searched for studies published before December 2021. Nomograms were grouped according to outcome measurements, the purpose of use, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to estimate nomogram group performance and predictor reliability. Reference tables summarizing the nomograms’ important characteristics were created. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 26 nomograms. Only four were externally validated. Study heterogeneity was significant, and the overall Risk of Bias (RoB) was high. Nomogram groups predicting overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and intravesical recurrence (IVR) had moderate discrimination accuracy (c-Index summary estimate with 95% confidence interval [95% CI] and prediction interval [PI] > 0.6). Nomogram groups predicting cancer-specific survival (CSS) had good discrimination accuracy (c-Index summary estimate with 95% CI and PI > 0.7). Advanced pathological tumor stage (≥ pT3) was the most reliable predictor of OS. Pathological tumor stage (≥ pT2), age, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were the most reliable predictors of CSS. LVI was the most reliable predictor of RFS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a moderate to good discrimination accuracy, severe heterogeneity discourages the uninformed use of postoperative prognostic UTUC nomograms. For nomograms to become of value in a generalizable population, future research must invest in external validation and assessment of clinical utility. Meanwhile, this systematic review serves as a reference tool for physicians choosing nomograms based on individual needs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=282596, identifier PROSPERO [CRD42021282596]. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9283688/ /pubmed/35847838 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.907975 Text en Copyright © 2022 Pallauf, König, D’Andrea, Laukhtina, Mostafaei, Motlagh, Quhal, Aydh, Yanagisawa, Kawada, Rajwa, Lusuardi, Soria, Karakiewicz, Rouprêt, Rink, Lotan, Margulis, Singla, Xylinas, Shariat and Pradere https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Oncology Pallauf, Maximilian König, Frederik D’Andrea, David Laukhtina, Ekaterina Mostafaei, Hadi Motlagh, Reza Sari Quhal, Fahad Aydh, Abdulmajeed Yanagisawa, Takafumi Kawada, Tatsushi Rajwa, Pawel Lusuardi, Lukas Soria, Francesco Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Rouprêt, Morgan Rink, Michael Lotan, Yair Margulis, Vitaly Singla, Nirmish Xylinas, Evanguelos Shariat, Shahrokh F. Pradere, Benjamin A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery |
title | A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery |
title_full | A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery |
title_fullStr | A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery |
title_short | A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Nomograms After UTUC Surgery |
title_sort | systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic nomograms after utuc surgery |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9283688/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35847838 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.907975 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pallaufmaximilian asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT konigfrederik asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT dandreadavid asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT laukhtinaekaterina asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT mostafaeihadi asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT motlaghrezasari asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT quhalfahad asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT aydhabdulmajeed asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT yanagisawatakafumi asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT kawadatatsushi asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT rajwapawel asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT lusuardilukas asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT soriafrancesco asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT karakiewiczpierrei asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT roupretmorgan asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT rinkmichael asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT lotanyair asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT margulisvitaly asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT singlanirmish asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT xylinasevanguelos asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT shariatshahrokhf asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT praderebenjamin asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT pallaufmaximilian systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT konigfrederik systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT dandreadavid systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT laukhtinaekaterina systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT mostafaeihadi systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT motlaghrezasari systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT quhalfahad systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT aydhabdulmajeed systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT yanagisawatakafumi systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT kawadatatsushi systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT rajwapawel systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT lusuardilukas systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT soriafrancesco systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT karakiewiczpierrei systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT roupretmorgan systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT rinkmichael systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT lotanyair systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT margulisvitaly systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT singlanirmish systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT xylinasevanguelos systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT shariatshahrokhf systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery AT praderebenjamin systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofprognosticnomogramsafterutucsurgery |