Evidence Hub

Quality of life after definitive treatment for bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Francolini G, Ghoshal A, Caini S, Piazzini T, Becherini C, Detti B, Di Cataldo V, Valzano M et al.

Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, 2024

Abstract

Radical cystectomy (RC) is considered the standard treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, RC is often burdened by significant impact on quality of life (QoL); Continence preserving methods (e.g., continent cutaneous urinary diversion and orthotopic neobladder-ONB), have been proposed as alternatives to improve postoperative QoL. Trimodal therapy (TMT) emerged as alternative to surgery. To assess the impact of these treatments from the patients' perspective, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature, focusing on studies reporting QoL data about each of the abovementioned approaches. A systematic review was carried out including all prospective and retrospective studies enrolling patientstreated with radical intent for non-metastatic MIBC from 1999 to 2021 (either RC or TMT). All studies included specifically reported QoL for one of the main treatment approaches explored (RC followed by ileal conduit urinary diversion-ICUD, ONB or TMT). Pooled analysis for EORTC QLQ-C30 and BLM-30 questionnaires showed that ONB yielded a significant advantage only for Physical Functioning (pooled mean standardized difference -0.73 SD, p-value 0.019, I 2 = 93 %) and for Emotional Functioning (pooled mean standardized difference -0.16 SD, p-value 0.029, I 2 = 0 %). A trend in favour of higher mean reported values after TMT for Global Health Score, Physical Functioning and Role Functioning was found, if compared to both RC approaches. Significant…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free