Scholarlink

Objective <p>Whether primary tumor location influences prognosis in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) remains contentious. We aim to clarify the prognostic impact of tumor location in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) by anatomically subsegmenting ureteral tumors, with specific focus on ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) carcinomas.</p> Methods <p>This retrospective cohort study evaluated 2,315 patients with non-metastatic, unifocal UTUC, including tumors localized to the renal pelvis or ureter, who underwent radical nephroureterectomy. Ureteral tumors were rigorously subsegmented into UPJ, proximal/middle/distal ureter, and ureterovesical junction (UVJ) using imaging and clinicopathological data. Survival outcomes—overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), bladder recurrence-free survival (BRFS), and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS)—were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for clinicopathological confounders.</p> Results <p>While univariate analysis showed that compared with renal pelvis tumors, ureteral tumors were associated with worse CSS, OS, MFS, BRFS and LRFS, this association was not independent in multivariable analysis. After conducting a detailed classification of the location of ureteral tumors, we discovered UPJ tumors demonstrated significantly superior OS and CSS compared to other ureteral carcinomas. Critically, UPJ location emerged as an independent predictor of improved OS (HR 0.444; 95% CI 0.240–0.820); <i>p</i> = 0.009) and CSS (HR 0.319; 95% CI 0.130–0.785; <i>p</i> = 0.013) in ureteral carcinoma patients, with the survival advantage most pronounced in muscle-invasive disease.</p> Conclusions <p>Traditional “renal pelvis versus ureter” dichotomy obscures prognostic heterogeneity. Anatomical refinement that recognizes UPJ tumors as a distinct, favorable subset provides a biologically grounded framework for individualized counseling. Furthermore, the recognition of UPJ tumors as a low-risk entity may encourage the investigation of kidney-sparing management strategies in appropriately selected patients.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Anatomical refinement matters: ureteropelvic junction location confers survival benefit for patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma after radical nephroureterectomy

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月12日

查看全文
  • Bao Guan,
  • Kun Peng,
  • Chao Cao,
  • Yicong Du,
  • Wei Zuo,
  • Wencong Han,
  • Chunru Xu,
  • Liqun Zhou,
  • Xuesong Li,
  • Han Hao

摘要

Objective

Whether primary tumor location influences prognosis in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) remains contentious. We aim to clarify the prognostic impact of tumor location in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) by anatomically subsegmenting ureteral tumors, with specific focus on ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) carcinomas.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study evaluated 2,315 patients with non-metastatic, unifocal UTUC, including tumors localized to the renal pelvis or ureter, who underwent radical nephroureterectomy. Ureteral tumors were rigorously subsegmented into UPJ, proximal/middle/distal ureter, and ureterovesical junction (UVJ) using imaging and clinicopathological data. Survival outcomes—overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), bladder recurrence-free survival (BRFS), and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS)—were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for clinicopathological confounders.

Results

While univariate analysis showed that compared with renal pelvis tumors, ureteral tumors were associated with worse CSS, OS, MFS, BRFS and LRFS, this association was not independent in multivariable analysis. After conducting a detailed classification of the location of ureteral tumors, we discovered UPJ tumors demonstrated significantly superior OS and CSS compared to other ureteral carcinomas. Critically, UPJ location emerged as an independent predictor of improved OS (HR 0.444; 95% CI 0.240–0.820); p = 0.009) and CSS (HR 0.319; 95% CI 0.130–0.785; p = 0.013) in ureteral carcinoma patients, with the survival advantage most pronounced in muscle-invasive disease.

Conclusions

Traditional “renal pelvis versus ureter” dichotomy obscures prognostic heterogeneity. Anatomical refinement that recognizes UPJ tumors as a distinct, favorable subset provides a biologically grounded framework for individualized counseling. Furthermore, the recognition of UPJ tumors as a low-risk entity may encourage the investigation of kidney-sparing management strategies in appropriately selected patients.