Biological and prognostic implications of biopsy upgrading for high‐grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma at nephroureterectomy

Abstract

Objectives Technical limitations of ureteroscopic (URS) biopsy has been considered responsible for substantial upgrading rate in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). However, the impact of tumor specific factors for upgrading remain uninvestigated. Methods Patients who underwent URS biopsy were included between 2005 and 2020 at 13 institutions. We assessed the prognostic impact of upgrading (low‐grade on URS biopsy) versus same grade (high‐grade on URS biopsy) for high‐grade UTUC tumors on radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) specimens. Results This study included 371 patients, of whom 112 (30%) and 259 (70%) were biopsy‐based low‐ and high‐grade tumors, respectively. Median follow‐up was 27.3 months. Patients with high‐grade biopsy were more likely to harbor unfavorable pathologic features, such as lymphovascular invasion (p < 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (LNs; p < 0.001). On multivariable analyses adjusting for the established risk factors, high‐grade biopsy was significantly associated with worse overall (hazard ratio [HR] 1.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10–2.75; p = 0.018), cancer‐specific (HR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.07–3.52; p = 0.03), and recurrence‐free survival (HR 1.80; 95% CI, 1.13–2.87; p = 0.013). In subgroup analyses of patients with pT2‐T4 and/or positive LN, its significant association retained. Furthermore, high‐grade biopsy in clinically non‐muscle invasive disease significantly predicted upstaging to final pathologically advanced disease (≥pT2) compared to low‐grade biopsy. Conclusions High tumor grade on URS biopsy is associated with features of biologically and clinically aggressive UTUC tumors. URS low‐grade UTUC that becomes upgraded to high‐grade might carry a better prognosis than high‐grade UTUC on URS. Tumor specific factors are likely to be responsible for upgrading to high‐grade on RNU.

The clinical impact of ureteroscopy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A multicenter study

“…This difference between clinical and pathological staging poses significant challenges in the choice of KSS. Researchers have proposed that not only technical errors but also tumor characteristics, such as tumor size, biopsy volume, and intratumor heterogeneity, lead to such a discrepancy 16–18 . Moreover, only half of the patients in our cohort who were stratified into the low‐risk disease group (i.e., KSS candidates) based on URSBx were diagnosed with low‐risk UTUC based on the pathological analysis of RNU specimens.…”

“…Researchers have proposed that not only technical errors but also tumor characteristics, such as tumor size, biopsy volume, and intratumor heterogeneity, lead to such a discrepancy. [16][17][18] Moreover, only half of the patients in our cohort who were stratified into the low-risk disease group (i.e., KSS candidates) based on URSBx were diagnosed with low-risk UTUC based on the pathological analysis of RNU specimens. Thus, further advancements in the preoperative diagnostic modality, the development of novel criteria, and the exploration and validation of biomarkers aiding the selection of KSS candidates for UTUC are needed to support KSS as a standard UTUC treatment strategy.…”