Value of tumour-infiltrating immune cells in predicting response to intravesical BCG in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Mehdi Kardoust Parizi, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Vitaly Margulis, Keiichiro Mori, Yair Lotan

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the predictive value of tumour-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs) on oncological outcomes and response to BCG treatment in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library in July 2020 to identify relevant studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The pooled recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate was calculated using a fixed-effect model. Results: We retrieved 15 studies (including 791 patients) evaluating the effect of TIICs on oncological outcomes in patients with NMIBC treated with intravesical BCG. TIICs were reported to be a significant predictor of oncological outcomes and response to BCG treatment in 10 studies. Tumour-associated macrophages were associated with worse RFS (pooled hazard ratio 2.30, 95% confidence interval 1.64–3.22). Conclusions: Based on these data, TIICs are significant predictors of RFS and response to BCG treatment in patients with NMIBC; therefore, incorporation of TIICs into risk stratification models may help patients and physicians in the clinical decision-making process in order to achieve the maximum possible benefit from BCG treatment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)617-625
Number of pages9
JournalBJU international
Volume127
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2021

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Value of tumour-infiltrating immune cells in predicting response to intravesical BCG in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this