Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to confirm the utility of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the Spanish Urological Club for Oncological Treatment (CUETO) scoring systems and to determine which model is preferred as a prognostic model in Korean patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1985 and 2011, 531 patients who were treated by transurethral resection of bladder cancer were retrospectively analyzed by use of the EORTC and CUETO models. Statistically, we performed Kaplan-Meier survival analysis; calculated Harrell's concordance index, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and cutoff values; and performed univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. RESULTS: For risk of recurrence, with the use of the EORTC model, all groups had statistically significant differences except between the group with a score of 0 and the group with a score of 1-4. With the use of the CUETO model, all groups differed significantly. For risk of progression, with the use of the EORTC model, significant differences were observed between all groups except between the group with a score of 2-6 and the group with a score of 7-13. With the use of the CUETO model, a significant difference was observed between the group with a score of 0 and the other groups. The concordance index of the EORTC and CUETO models was 0.759 and 0.836 for recurrence and 0.704 and 0.745 for progression, respectively. The area under the ROC curve for the EORTC and CUETO models was 0.832 and 0.894 for recurrence and 0.722 and 0.724 for progression, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both scoring systems, especially the CUETO model, showed value in predicting recurrence and progression in Korean patients, which will help in individualizing treatment and follow-up schedules.