ABSTRACT
Kidney-sparing surgery (KSS) for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is a promising alternative to radical nephroureterectomy, especially for low-risk cases. However, due to the established risk of ipsilateral UTUC recurrence caused by the implantation of floating neoplastic cells after endoscopic resection, adjuvant endocavitary (endoureteral) instillations have been proposed. Instillation therapy may be also used as primary treatment for UTUC. The two most studied drugs that have been evaluated in both the adjuvant and primary setting of endocavitary instillation are mitomycin C and Bacillus Calmette-Guerin. The current paper provides an overview of the endocavitary treatments for UTUC, focusing on methods of administration, novel formulations, oncologic outcomes (in terms of endocavitary recurrence and progression), as well as on complications. In particular, the role of UGN-101 as a primary chemoablative treatment of primary noninvasive, endoscopically unresectable, low-grade, UTUC has been analysed. The drug achieved a complete response rate of 58% after the induction cycle, with a durable response independently of the maintenance cycle. The cumulative experience on the role of UUT instillation therapy appears encouraging; however, no definitive conclusions can be drawn about its therapeutic benefit. Given the current state of the art, any decision to administer adjuvant endoureteral therapy for UTUC should be carefully weighed against the potential adverse events. Nevertheless, newer investigations that improve visualization during ureteroscopy, genomic characterization, novel drugs and innovative strategies of improved drug delivery are under evaluation. The landscape of KSS for the treatment of the UTUC is evolving and seems promising.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Abdominal surgery is frequently followed by immune dysfunction usually lasting for several days. This is especially important in cases with tumour diseases as an intact immune function is essential in this situation. Therefore, we analysed the outcome of tumour-bearing mice in a mouse model of surgically induced immune dysfunction (SID). METHODS: In male C57BL/6 mice, a pancreatic tumour was implanted orthotopically. Following tumour implantation, the model of SID was applied. The control groups were either laparotomised or underwent no surgical procedure. The survival rate was determined by observation for >60 days. The tumour growth progress was imaged by a 7-tesla small animal MRI. RESULTS: On day 60 after tumour implantation, the survival rate in SID mice was reduced to 41%. In the laparotomised group, 81% of mice survived, while the control group had a survival rate of 75%. These differences were significant (SID vs. control: p < 0.02, and SID vs. laparotomy: p < 0.002). The tumour volume was not influenced by the degree of surgical trauma. CONCLUSION: In pancreatic cancer, the SID model is ideally suited to investigate the influence of SID on this tumour entity.