Sterile Water Versus Glycine in Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumors—Immunogenic and Clinical Implications

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY European urology focus Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.euf.2024.03.002
Haim Herzberg , Roi Babaoof , Ron Marom , Yotam Veredgorn , Ziv Savin , Karin Lifshitz , Shmulik Noefeld , Rinat Lasmanovitz , Shayel Bercovich , Tomer Lamhoot , Sharon Amir , Avi Beri , David Margel , Jack Baniel , Roy Mano , Ofer Yossepowitch
{"title":"Sterile Water Versus Glycine in Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumors—Immunogenic and Clinical Implications","authors":"Haim Herzberg ,&nbsp;Roi Babaoof ,&nbsp;Ron Marom ,&nbsp;Yotam Veredgorn ,&nbsp;Ziv Savin ,&nbsp;Karin Lifshitz ,&nbsp;Shmulik Noefeld ,&nbsp;Rinat Lasmanovitz ,&nbsp;Shayel Bercovich ,&nbsp;Tomer Lamhoot ,&nbsp;Sharon Amir ,&nbsp;Avi Beri ,&nbsp;David Margel ,&nbsp;Jack Baniel ,&nbsp;Roy Mano ,&nbsp;Ofer Yossepowitch","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2024.03.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objective</h3><div>We compared the oncologic outcomes of patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TUBRT) using sterile water vs glycine irrigation. The tumoricidal and immunogenic effects of these solutions on urothelial cancer cell lines were investigated.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The medical records of 530 consecutive patients who underwent TURBT using sterile water or glycine irrigation for NMIBC were reviewed. Recurrence and progression rates were evaluated using time dependent analyses.Bladder cancer cell lines (RT4, T24 and 5637) were treated with glycine and sterile water. Cell viability was evaluated with the XTT assay. Cell membrane calreticulin levels were evaluated with flow cytometry. Extracellular high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) and heat shock 70 (HSP70) protein levels were evaluated using western blots.</div></div><div><h3>Key findings and limitations</h3><div>After propensity score matching each study arm comprised 161 patients. Median follow-up was 13.6 months (IQR 6.2, 24.5). The 2-year recurrence free survival was significantly lower in the sterile water vs glycine group (43% vs 71%, respectively, p&lt;0.0001). Similarly, the 2-years progression free survival was significantly lower in the sterile water vs glycine group (85% vs 94%, respectively, p&lt;0.014). Sterile water treatment resulted in the lowest number of viable cells. Early and late immunogenic cell death markers were markedly elevated in cells treated with glycine.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3><div>Sterile water compared to glycine irrigation during TURBT for NMIBC was associated with higher recurrence and progression rates. Possible explanation for these findings is the diminished immune response associated with sterile water reflected in a comparatively lesser expression of immune response inducers.</div></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><div>We compared two irrigation fluids in non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer surgery: glycine and sterile water. Glycine outperformed sterile water in cancer recurrence, possibly boosting immunogenicity over sterile water.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12160,"journal":{"name":"European urology focus","volume":"10 5","pages":"Pages 796-804"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405456924000464","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective

We compared the oncologic outcomes of patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TUBRT) using sterile water vs glycine irrigation. The tumoricidal and immunogenic effects of these solutions on urothelial cancer cell lines were investigated.

Methods

The medical records of 530 consecutive patients who underwent TURBT using sterile water or glycine irrigation for NMIBC were reviewed. Recurrence and progression rates were evaluated using time dependent analyses.Bladder cancer cell lines (RT4, T24 and 5637) were treated with glycine and sterile water. Cell viability was evaluated with the XTT assay. Cell membrane calreticulin levels were evaluated with flow cytometry. Extracellular high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) and heat shock 70 (HSP70) protein levels were evaluated using western blots.

Key findings and limitations

After propensity score matching each study arm comprised 161 patients. Median follow-up was 13.6 months (IQR 6.2, 24.5). The 2-year recurrence free survival was significantly lower in the sterile water vs glycine group (43% vs 71%, respectively, p<0.0001). Similarly, the 2-years progression free survival was significantly lower in the sterile water vs glycine group (85% vs 94%, respectively, p<0.014). Sterile water treatment resulted in the lowest number of viable cells. Early and late immunogenic cell death markers were markedly elevated in cells treated with glycine.

Conclusions and clinical implications

Sterile water compared to glycine irrigation during TURBT for NMIBC was associated with higher recurrence and progression rates. Possible explanation for these findings is the diminished immune response associated with sterile water reflected in a comparatively lesser expression of immune response inducers.

Patient summary

We compared two irrigation fluids in non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer surgery: glycine and sterile water. Glycine outperformed sterile water in cancer recurrence, possibly boosting immunogenicity over sterile water.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术中的无菌水与甘氨酸--致病性和临床意义。
背景和目的:我们比较了接受经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术(TUBRT)的非肌层浸润性膀胱癌(NMIBC)患者使用无菌水与甘氨酸灌注的肿瘤治疗效果。研究了这些溶液对尿路上皮癌细胞株的杀瘤和免疫效应:方法:研究人员回顾了 530 名连续接受无菌水或甘氨酸灌洗 TURBT 治疗的 NMIBC 患者的病历。用甘氨酸和无菌水处理膀胱癌细胞株(RT4、T24 和 5637)。用 XTT 法评估细胞活力。用流式细胞仪评估细胞膜钙网蛋白水平。细胞外高迁移率基团框 1 (HMGB1) 和热休克 70 (HSP70) 蛋白水平采用 Western 印迹法进行评估:经过倾向评分匹配后,每个研究臂由161名患者组成。中位随访时间为13.6个月(IQR为6.2-24.5)。无菌水组与甘氨酸组的 2 年无复发存活率明显较低(分别为 43% 与 71%,p 结论和临床意义:在对 NMIBC 进行 TURBT 期间,无菌水灌洗与甘氨酸灌洗相比,复发率和病情进展率更高。患者总结:我们比较了非肌层浸润性膀胱癌手术中的两种冲洗液:甘氨酸和无菌水。甘氨酸在癌症复发方面的表现优于无菌水,这可能是因为甘氨酸的免疫原性高于无菌水。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European urology focus
European urology focus Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
274
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology Focus is a new sister journal to European Urology and an official publication of the European Association of Urology (EAU). EU Focus will publish original articles, opinion piece editorials and topical reviews on a wide range of urological issues such as oncology, functional urology, reconstructive urology, laparoscopy, robotic surgery, endourology, female urology, andrology, paediatric urology and sexual medicine. The editorial team welcome basic and translational research articles in the field of urological diseases. Authors may be solicited by the Editor directly. All submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by a panel of experts before being considered for publication.
期刊最新文献
Better Oncological Outcomes After Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography-guided Salvage Radiotherapy Following Prostatectomy. Microbiome-based Therapeutics: Cutting-edge Innovation. Trimodality Therapy Versus Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Matched Cohort Studies. Role of Microbiome Testing in Everyday Clinical Urology. Oncological Outcomes Following Robotic Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Testicular Cancer: A Worldwide Multicenter Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1