Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Feb;8(1):12-20.
doi: 10.21037/tau.2018.11.06.

Review on gender differences in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer

Affiliations
Review

Review on gender differences in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer

Konrad Bilski et al. Transl Androl Urol. 2019 Feb.

Abstract

Differences in the epidemiology, diagnosis and outcomes according to gender in patients diagnosed with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) has been widely reported. In this article we present gender-specific differences in NMIBC in terms of epidemiology, risk factors, first clinical presentation, management and clinical outcomes based on systematically review evidence of existing literature. A literature search of English-language publications that included an analysis of the association of gender differences in patients with NMIBC was performed using PubMed. Sixty-four studies were selected for analysis with consensus of all authors. The incidence and mortality for urothelial bladder cancer (UBC) are higher in men, whereas cancer specific mortality to incidence ratio is significantly lower for men than for women. This phenomenon could be partially explained by differences in exposure to bladder cancer carcinogens. However female gender is associated with higher stage at presentation. Thirteen studies with a total of 11,069 patients diagnosed with NMIBC were included for analysis according to outcomes. In studies that found statistically significant differences in outcomes between sexes, female gender was reported as risk factor for disease recurrence, progression or cancer specific mortality. None of included studies found worse outcomes in men when compared to women with NMIBC. Results of our review suggest that female gender in patients diagnosed with NMIBC is associated-though inconsistently-with higher stage at presentation and poorer outcomes. Numerous factors may influence gender gap in incidence rate, clinical management and reported outcomes. Consensus on comparable data collection in routine practice and prospective trials including clinical outcomes are required to identify gender-specific differences in patients diagnosed with NMIBC.

Keywords: Bladder cancer; gender; non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the study inclusion process according to PRISMA.

References

    1. Edgren G, Liang L, Adami HO, et al. Enigmatic sex disparities in cancer incidence. Eur J Epidemiol 2012;27:187-96. 10.1007/s10654-011-9647-5 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Najari BB, Rink M, Li PS, et al. Sex disparities in cancer mortality: the risks of being a man in the United States. J Urol 2013;189:1470-4. 10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.153 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration , Fitzmaurice C, Akinyemiju TF, et al. Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2016: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. JAMA Oncol 2018;4:1553-68. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2706 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015;136:E359-86. 10.1002/ijc.29210 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Scosyrev E, Noyes K, Feng C, et al. Sex and racial differences in bladder cancer presentation and mortality in the US. Cancer 2009;115:68-74. 10.1002/cncr.23986 - DOI - PubMed