Home
Abstract
My Abstract(s)
Login
ePosters
Back
Final Presentation Format
Podium Abstract
Eposter Presentation
Eposter in PDF Format
Accept format: PDF. The file size should not be more than 5MB
Eposter in Image Format
Accept format: PNG/JPG/WEBP. The file size should not be more than 2MB
Presentation Date / Time
Submission Status
Submitted
Abstract
Abstract Title
BCG response in primary and metachronous non-muscle invasive bladder cancer following prior upper tract urothelial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presentation Type
Podium Abstract
Manuscript Type
Meta Analysis / Systematic Review
Abstract Category *
Oncology: Bladder and UTUC
Author's Information
Number of Authors (including submitting/presenting author) *
12
No more than 10 authors can be listed (as per the Good Publication Practice (GPP) Guidelines).
Please ensure the authors are listed in the right order.
Country
Singapore
Co-author 1
Yu Guang Tan tan.yu.guang@singhealth.com.sg Singapore General Hospital Urology Singapore Singapore *
Co-author 2
Khi Yung Fong khiyung@gmail.com Singapore General Hospital Urology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 3
Benjamin JH Lim limjiahan@gmail.com Singapore General Hospital Urology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 4
Tsung Wen Chong chong.tsung.wen@singhealth.com.sg Singapore General Hospital Urology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 5
Kae Jack Tay tay.kae.jack@singhealth.com.sg Singapore General Hospital Urology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 6
Kenneth Chen kenneth.chen@singhealth.com.sg Singapore General Hospital Urology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 7
John SP Yuen john.yuen.s.p@singhealth.com.sg Singapore General Hospital Urology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 8
Johan Chan johan.chan@singhealth.com.sg National Cancer Centre Singapore Medical Oncology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 9
Jason YS Chan jason.chan.y.s@singhealth.com.sg National Cancer Centre Singapore Medical Oncology Singapore Singapore -
Co-author 10
Syed A Hussain syed.hussain@sheffield.ac.uk Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Urology Sheffield United Kingdom -
Co-author 11
Michael R Abern michael.abern@duke.edu Duke University School of Medicine Urology Durham United States -
Co-author 12
Ashish M Kamat akamat@mdanderson.org University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre Urology Houston United States -
Co-author 13
-
Co-author 14
-
Co-author 15
-
Co-author 16
-
Co-author 17
-
Co-author 18
-
Co-author 19
-
Co-author 20
-
Abstract Content
Introduction
Emerging evidence suggests that metachronous bladder recurrence after prior UTUC treatment (m-NMIBC) is distinct from primary NMIBC (p-NMIBC). They are likely to be more aggressive and show poorer response to Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG). This systematic review aims to evaluate differences in BCG outcomes between m-NMIBC and p-NMIBC.
Materials and Methods
A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was performed to identify relevant studies that reported outcomes for p-NMIBC and m-NIMBC. The primary endpoints analyzed were recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Both one and two-stage meta-analyses were performed.
Results
Seven cohort studies were identified. Patients with p-NMIBC consistently showed longer RFS (one-stage meta-analysis: HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.46–0.71, p<0.001; two-stage meta-analysis: HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.38–0.50, p<0.001, I²=0%). Recurrence rates were notably higher in m-NMIBC (45.2–55.9%) compared to p-NMIBC (22.8–40.0%). P-NMIBC also demonstrated better outcomes for PFS (one-stage meta-analysis: HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35–0.83, p=0.005; two-stage meta-analysis: HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22–0.90, p=0.035, I²=0%). For OS, initial one-stage meta-analysis findings indicated longer OS for p-NMIBC (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.56–0.73, p<0.001), but was no longer significant on two-stage meta-analysis, with moderate heterogeneity (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.18–4.23, p=0.751, I²=64%). CSS showed no significant difference between p-NMIBC and m-NMIBC (one-stage meta-analysis: HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.24–1.17, p=0.116; two-stage meta-analysis: HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.00–1.20, p=0.420, I²=0%).
Conclusions
Patients with m-NMIBC following prior treatment for UTUC exhibit a significantly poorer response to BCG compared to those with p-NMIBC, with nearly double the rates of recurrence and disease progression. Incorporating UTUC history into future risk prediction models is essential for more accurate prognostication and clinical trials design.
Keywords
Upper Tract Urothelial Cancer, BCG, Bladder Cancer
Figure 1
https://storage.unitedwebnetwork.com/files/1237/43b91769a9772bcea1bff139b5e6c8cf.png
Figure 1 Caption
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of included studies.
Figure 2
Figure 2 Caption
Figure 3
Figure 3 Caption
Figure 4
Figure 4 Caption
Figure 5
Figure 5 Caption
Character Count
2988
Vimeo Link
Presentation Details
Session
Free Paper Podium(18): Oncology Bladder UTUC (D) & Functional Urology (B)
Date
Aug. 16 (Sat.)
Time
15:42 - 15:48
Presentation Order
3