Risk Prediction Models of Locoregional Failure After Radical Cystectomy for Urothelial Carcinoma: External Validation in a Cohort of Korean Patients


      To evaluate the predictive accuracy and general applicability of the locoregional failure model in a different cohort of patients treated with radical cystectomy.

      Methods and Materials

      A total of 398 patients were included in the analysis. Death and isolated distant metastasis were considered competing events, and patients without any events were censored at the time of last follow-up. The model included the 3 variables pT classification, the number of lymph nodes identified, and margin status, as follows: low risk (≤pT2), intermediate risk (≥pT3 with ≥10 nodes removed and negative margins), and high risk (≥pT3 with <10 nodes removed or positive margins).


      The bootstrap-corrected concordance index of the model 5 years after radical cystectomy was 66.2%. When the risk stratification was applied to the validation cohort, the 5-year locoregional failure estimates were 8.3%, 21.2%, and 46.3% for the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups, respectively. The risk of locoregional failure differed significantly between the low-risk and intermediate-risk groups (subhazard ratio [SHR], 2.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-5.11; P<.001) and between the low-risk and high-risk groups (SHR, 4.28; 95% CI, 2.17-8.45; P<.001). Although decision curves were appropriately affected by the incidence of the competing risk, decisions about the value of the models are not likely to be affected because the model remains of value over a wide range of threshold probabilities.


      The model is not completely accurate, but it demonstrates a modest level of discrimination, adequate calibration, and meaningful net benefit gain for prediction of locoregional failure after radical cystectomy.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      ASTRO Member Login
      ASTRO Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Use your society credentials to access all journal content and features.

      Purchase one-time access:

      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Stein J.P.
        • Lieskovsky G.
        • Cote R.
        • et al.
        Radical cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder cancer: Long-term results in 1,054 patients.
        J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19: 666-675
        • Madersbacher S.
        • Hochreiter W.
        • Burkhard F.
        • et al.
        Radical cystectomy for bladder cancer today: A homogeneous series without neoadjuvant therapy.
        J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 690-696
        • Sonpavde G.
        • Khan M.M.
        • Lerner S.P.
        • et al.
        Disease-free survival at 2 or 3 years correlates with 5-year overall survival of patients undergoing radical cystectomy for muscle invasive bladder cancer.
        J Urol. 2011; 185: 456-461
        • Baumann B.C.
        • Guzzo T.J.
        • He J.
        • et al.
        A novel risk stratification to predict local-regional failures in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder after radical cystectomy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 85: 81-88
        • Christodouleas J.P.
        • Baumann B.C.
        • He J.
        • et al.
        Optimizing bladder cancer locoregional failure risk stratification after radical cystectomy using SWOG 8710.
        Cancer. 2014; 120: 1272-1289
        • Moon K.C.
        • Kim M.
        • Kwak C.
        • et al.
        External validation of online predictive models for prediction of cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Mar 4;
        • Harrell Jr., F.E.
        • Lee K.L.
        • Mark D.B.
        Multivariable prognostic models: Issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.
        Stat Med. 1996; 15: 361-387
        • Heagerty P.J.
        • Lumley T.
        • Pepe M.S.
        Time-dependent ROC curves for censored survival data and a diagnostic marker.
        Biometrics. 2000; 56: 337-344
        • Gray R.J.
        A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk.
        Ann Stat. 1988; 16: 1141-1154
        • Vickers A.J.
        • Elkin E.B.
        Decision curve analysis: A novel method for evaluating prediction models.
        Med Decis Making. 2006; 26: 565-574
        • Vickers A.J.
        • Cronin A.M.
        • Elkin E.B.
        • et al.
        Extensions to decision curve analysis, a novel method for evaluating diagnostic tests, prediction models and molecular markers.
        BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008; 8: 53
        • Visser O.
        • Nieuwenhuijzen J.A.
        • Horenblas S.
        Members of the Urological Oncology Working Group of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Amsterdam. Local recurrence after cystectomy and survival of patients with bladder cancer: A population based study in greater Amsterdam.
        J Urol. 2005; 174: 97-102
        • Hassan J.M.
        • Cookson M.S.
        • Smith Jr., J.A.
        • et al.
        Patterns of initial transitional cell recurrence in patients after cystectomy.
        J Urol. 2006; 175: 2054-2057
        • Baumann B.C.
        • Guzzo T.J.
        • He J.
        • et al.
        Bladder cancer patterns of pelvic failure: Implications for adjuvant radiation therapy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 85: 363-369
        • Pollack A.
        • Zagars G.K.
        • Cole C.J.
        • et al.
        The relationship of local control to distant metastasis in muscle invasive bladder cancer.
        J Urol. 1995; 154: 2059-2063
        • Cornu J.N.
        • Neuzillet Y.
        • Hervé J.M.
        • et al.
        Patterns of local recurrence after radical cystectomy in a contemporary series of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
        World J Urol. 2012; 30: 821-826
        • Volkmer B.G.
        • Kuefer R.
        • Bartsch Jr., G.C.
        • et al.
        Oncological followup after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: Is there any benefit?.
        J Urol. 2009; 181: 1587-1593
        • Skinner E.C.
        • Stein J.P.
        • Skinner D.G.
        Surgical benchmarks for the treatment of invasive bladder cancer.
        Urol Oncol. 2007; 25: 66-71
        • Herr H.W.
        • Faulkner J.R.
        • Grossman H.B.
        • et al.
        Surgical factors influence bladder cancer outcomes: A cooperative group report.
        J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 2781-2789
        • Advanced Bladder Cancer Overview Collaboration
        Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for invasive bladder cancer.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005; : CD005246
        • Zaghloul M.S.
        • Awwad H.K.
        • Akoush H.H.
        • et al.
        Postoperative radiotherapy of carcinoma in Bilharzial bladder: Improved disease free survival through improving local control.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1992; 23: 511-517
        • Fine J.P.
        • Gray R.J.
        A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk.
        J Am Stat Assoc. 1999; 94: 496-504
        • Satagopan J.M.
        • Ben-Porat L.
        • Berwick M.
        • et al.
        A note on competing risks in survival data analysis.
        Br J Cancer. 2004; 91: 1229-1235
        • Nguyen C.T.
        • Stephenson A.J.
        • Kattan M.W.
        Are nomograms needed in the management of bladder cancer?.
        Urol Oncol. 2010; 28: 102-107


      Commenting Guidelines

      To submit a comment for a journal article, please use the space above and note the following:

      • We will review submitted comments as soon as possible, striving for within two business days.
      • This forum is intended for constructive dialogue. Comments that are commercial or promotional in nature, pertain to specific medical cases, are not relevant to the article for which they have been submitted, or are otherwise inappropriate will not be posted.
      • We require that commenters identify themselves with names and affiliations.
      • Comments must be in compliance with our Terms & Conditions.
      • Comments are not peer-reviewed.