Korean J Urol.  2014 Sep;55(9):574-580. 10.4111/kju.2014.55.9.574.

Prognostic Factors for Urachal Cancer: A Bayesian Model-Averaging Approach

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. youngd74@yuhs.ac
  • 2Department of Urology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • 3Robot and Minimal Invasive Surgery Center, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract

PURPOSE
This study was conducted to evaluate prognostic factors and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in a cohort of 41 patients with urachal carcinoma by use of a Bayesian model-averaging approach.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Our cohort included 41 patients with urachal carcinoma who underwent extended partial cystectomy, total cystectomy, transurethral resection, chemotherapy, or radiotherapy at a single institute. All patients were classified by both the Sheldon and the Mayo staging systems according to histopathologic reports and preoperative radiologic findings. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional-hazards regression models were carried out to investigate prognostic factors, and a Bayesian model-averaging approach was performed to confirm the significance of each variable by using posterior probabilities.
RESULTS
The mean age of the patients was 49.88+/-13.80 years and the male-to-female ratio was 24:17. The median follow-up was 5.42 years (interquartile range, 2.8-8.4 years). Five- and 10-year CSS rates were 55.9% and 43.4%, respectively. Lower Sheldon (p=0.004) and Mayo (p<0.001) stage, mucinous adenocarcinoma (p=0.005), and larger tumor size (p=0.023) were significant predictors of high survival probability on the basis of a log-rank test. By use of the Bayesian model-averaging approach, higher Mayo stage and larger tumor size were significant predictors of cancer-specific mortality in urachal carcinoma.
CONCLUSIONS
The Mayo staging system might be more effective than the Sheldon staging system. In addition, the multivariate analyses suggested that tumor size may be a prognostic factor for urachal carcinoma.

Keyword

Follow-up studies; Survival; Urachal cancer

MeSH Terms

Adult
Bayes Theorem
Carcinoma/*pathology/*therapy
Disease-Free Survival
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Prognosis
Proportional Hazards Models
Risk Factors
Treatment Outcome
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/*pathology/*therapy

Figure

  • FIG. 1 Cancer-specific survival (CSS) in 41 patients in the study cohort. Five- and 10-year CSS rates were 55.9% and 43.4%, respectively.

  • FIG. 2 (A) <55 y vs. ≥55 y; (B) Sheldon stage IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC vs. Sheldon stage IIID, IVA, and IVB; (C) Mayo stages I and II vs. Mayo stages III and IV; (D) mucinous adenocarcinoma vs. others; and (E) <5 cm vs. ≥5 cm.


Cited by  1 articles

Predictive factors and treatment outcomes of Steinstrasse following shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: A Bayesian regression model analysis
Ho Won Kang, Kang Su Cho, Won Sik Ham, Dong Hyuk Kang, Hae Do Jung, Jong Kyou Kwon, Young Deuk Choi, Joo Yong Lee
Investig Clin Urol. 2018;59(2):112-118.    doi: 10.4111/icu.2018.59.2.112.


Reference

1. Paner GP, Barkan GA, Mehta V, Sirintrapun SJ, Tsuzuki T, Sebo TJ, et al. Urachal carcinomas of the nonglandular type: salient features and considerations in pathologic diagnosis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012; 36:432–442.
2. Van Calsteren K, Van Mensel K, Joniau S, Oyen R, Hanssens M, Amant F, et al. Urachal carcinoma during pregnancy. Urology. 2006; 67:1290.e19–1290.e21.
3. Scabini S, Rimini E, Romairone E, Scordamaglia R, Vallarino L, Giasotto V, et al. Urachal tumour: case report of a poorly understood carcinoma. World J Surg Oncol. 2009; 7:82.
4. Sheldon CA, Clayman RV, Gonzalez R, Williams RD, Fraley EE. Malignant urachal lesions. J Urol. 1984; 131:1–8.
5. Ashley RA, Inman BA, Sebo TJ, Leibovich BC, Blute ML, Kwon ED, et al. Urachal carcinoma: clinicopathologic features and long-term outcomes of an aggressive malignancy. Cancer. 2006; 107:712–720.
6. Mohile SG, Schleicher L, Petrylak DP. Treatment of metastatic urachal carcinoma in an elderly woman. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008; 5:55–58.
7. Cothren C, Ferucci P, Harken AH, Veve R, Finlayson CA, Johnson JL. Urachal carcinoma: key points for the general surgeon. Am Surg. 2002; 68:201–203.
8. Chan ES, Ng CF, Chui KL, Lo KL, Hou SM, Yip SK. Novel approach of laparoscopic transperitoneal en bloc resection of urachal tumor and umbilectomy with a comparison of various techniques. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2009; 19:423–426.
9. Elser C, Sweet J, Cheran SK, Haider MA, Jewett M, Sridhar SS. A case of metastatic urachal adenocarcinoma treated with several different chemotherapeutic regimens. Can Urol Assoc J. 2012; 6:E27–E31.
10. Mostofi FK, Thomson RV, Dean AL Jr. Mucous adenocarcinoma of the urinary bladder. Cancer. 1955; 8:741–758.
11. Nadjmi B, Whitehead ED, Mckiel CF Jr, Graf EC, Callahan DH. Carcinoma of the urachus: report of two cases and review of the literature. J Urol. 1968; 100:738–743.
12. Cho KS, Yang WJ, Cho NH, Yang SC, Hong SJ, Choi YD. The clinical characteristics and prognosis of urachal cancer. Korean J Urol. 2004; 45:1229–1234.
13. Henly DR, Farrow GM, Zincke H. Urachal cancer: role of conservative surgery. Urology. 1993; 42:635–639.
14. Hong SH, Kim JC, Hwang TK. Laparoscopic partial cystectomy with en bloc resection of the urachus for urachal adenocarcinoma. Int J Urol. 2007; 14:963–965.
15. Kakizoe T, Matsumoto K, Andoh M, Nishio Y, Kishi K. Adenocarcinoma of urachus. Report of 7 cases and review of literature. Urology. 1983; 21:360–366.
16. Herr HW, Bochner BH, Sharp D, Dalbagni G, Reuter VE. Urachal carcinoma: contemporary surgical outcomes. J Urol. 2007; 178:74–78.
17. Pinthus JH, Haddad R, Trachtenberg J, Holowaty E, Bowler J, Herzenberg AM, et al. Population based survival data on urachal tumors. J Urol. 2006; 175:2042–2047.
18. Siefker-Radtke A. Urachal carcinoma: surgical and chemotherapeutic options. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2006; 6:1715–1721.
19. Ghazizadeh M, Yamamoto S, Kurokawa K. Clinical features of urachal carcinoma in Japan: review of 157 patients. Urol Res. 1983; 11:235–238.
20. Shou J, Ma J, Xu B. Adenocarcinoma of the urinary bladder: a report of 27 cases. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 1999; 21:461–463.
21. Asano K, Miki J, Yamada H, Maeda S, Abe K, Furuta A, et al. Carcinoma of urachus: report of 15 cases and review of literature: is total cystectomy the treatment of choice for urachal carcinoma? Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 2003; 94:487–494.
22. Cho SY, Moon KC, Park JH, Kwak C, Kim HH, Ku JH. Outcomes of Korean patients with clinically localized urachal or non-urachal adenocarcinoma of the bladder. Urol Oncol. 2013; 31:24–31.
23. Johnson DE, Hodge GB, Abdul-Karim FW, Ayala AG. Urachal carcinoma. Urology. 1985; 26:218–221.
24. Grignon DJ, Ro JY, Ayala AG, Johnson DE, Ordonez NG. Primary adenocarcinoma of the urinary bladder. A clinicopathologic analysis of 72 cases. Cancer. 1991; 67:2165–2172.
25. Herr HW. Urachal carcinoma: the case for extended partial cystectomy. J Urol. 1994; 151:365–366.
26. Santucci RA, True LD, Lange PH. Is partial cystectomy the treatment of choice for mucinous adenocarcinoma of the urachus? Urology. 1997; 49:536–540.
27. Dandekar NP, Dalal AV, Tongaonkar HB, Kamat MR. Adenocarcinoma of bladder. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997; 23:157–160.
28. Siefker-Radtke AO, Gee J, Shen Y, Wen S, Daliani D, Millikan RE, et al. Multimodality management of urachal carcinoma: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. J Urol. 2003; 169:1295–1298.
29. Wright JL, Porter MP, Li CI, Lange PH, Lin DW. Differences in survival among patients with urachal and nonurachal adenocarcinomas of the bladder. Cancer. 2006; 107:721–728.
30. Yazawa S, Kikuchi E, Takeda T, Matsumoto K, Miyajima A, Nakagawa K, et al. Surgical and chemotherapeutic options for urachal carcinoma: report of ten cases and literature review. Urol Int. 2012; 88:209–214.
Full Text Links
  • KJU
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr