Multicenter validation of the prognostic value of patient age in patients treated with radical cystectomy

Thomas F. Chromecki, Julian Mauermann, Eugene K. Cha, Robert S. Svatek, Harun Fajkovic, Pierre I. Karakiewicz, Yair Lotan, Derya Tilki, Patrick J. Bastian, Bjoern G. Volkmer, Francesco Montorsi, Wassim Kassouf, Giacomo Novara, Hans Martin Fritsche, Vincenzo Ficarra, Christian G. Stief, Colin P. Dinney, Eila Skinner, Karl Pummer, Yves FradetShahrokh F. Shariat

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Purpose: Small studies have suggested that older patients have worse outcomes following radical cystectomy (RC) for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB). We evaluated the association of patient age with clinical outcomes in a large multi-institutional RC series. Methods: Data were collected from 4,429 patients treated with RC and lymphadenectomy for UCB without neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Age at RC was analyzed both as a continuous and categorical variable. Results: Higher age at RC, analyzed as a continuous or categorical variable, was associated with advanced pathologic stage (P <0. 001), higher tumor grade (P = 0. 045), presence of lymphovascular invasion (P = 0. 018), and positive soft-tissue surgical margin status (P = 0. 004). Elderly patients were less likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy (P <0. 001). In multivariable analyses, higher age was associated with disease recurrence, cancer-specific, and overall mortality (P <0. 001). Patients ≥80 years had a significantly greater risk of cancer-specific mortality than patients

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)753-759
Number of pages7
JournalWorld Journal of Urology
Volume30
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2012

Keywords

  • Age
  • Prognosis
  • Radical cystectomy
  • Survival
  • Urothelial carcinoma

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Multicenter validation of the prognostic value of patient age in patients treated with radical cystectomy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this