Comparison of clinicopathologic characteristics, epigenetic biomarkers and prognosis between renal pelvic and ureteral tumors in upper tract urothelial carcinoma
Dong Fang,
Shiming He,
Gengyan Xiong,
Nirmish Singla,
Zhenpeng Cao,
Lei Zhang,
Xuesong Li,
Liqun Zhou
Affiliations
Dong Fang
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre
Shiming He
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre
Gengyan Xiong
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre
Nirmish Singla
Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
Zhenpeng Cao
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre
Lei Zhang
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre
Xuesong Li
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre
Liqun Zhou
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre
Abstract Background There's no consensus about the difference between renal pelvic and ureteral tumors in terms of clinical features, pathological outcomes, epigenetic biomarkers and prognosis. Methods The data of 341 patients with renal pelvic tumors and 271 patients with ureteral tumors who underwent radical nephroureterectomy between 1999 and 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. The clinicopathologic features, gene promoters methylation status and oncologic outcomes were compared. Regression analysis was performed to identify oncologic prognosticators. Results Patients with ureteral tumors were relatively older (p = 0.002), and had higher likelihood of pre-operative renal insufficiency (p 0.05), while gene methylation status was demonstrated to be an independent prognostic factor. Conclusion Renal pelvic tumors and ureteral tumors exhibited significant differences in clinicopathologic characteristics and epigenetic biomarkers. Gene promoter methylation might be an important mechanism in explaining distinct tumor patterns and behaviors in UTUC.