Spandidos Publications Logo
  • About
    • About Spandidos
    • Aims and Scopes
    • Abstracting and Indexing
    • Editorial Policies
    • Reprints and Permissions
    • Job Opportunities
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Contact
  • Journals
    • All Journals
    • Oncology Letters
      • Oncology Letters
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Oncology
      • International Journal of Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Biomedical Reports
      • Biomedical Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Reports
      • Oncology Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Medicine International
      • Medicine International
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
  • Articles
  • Information
    • Information for Authors
    • Information for Reviewers
    • Information for Librarians
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Conferences
  • Language Editing
Spandidos Publications Logo
  • About
    • About Spandidos
    • Aims and Scopes
    • Abstracting and Indexing
    • Editorial Policies
    • Reprints and Permissions
    • Job Opportunities
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Contact
  • Journals
    • All Journals
    • Biomedical Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Medicine International
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Letters
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
  • Articles
  • Information
    • For Authors
    • For Reviewers
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Conferences
  • Language Editing
Login Register Submit
  • This site uses cookies
  • You can change your cookie settings at any time by following the instructions in our Cookie Policy. To find out more, you may read our Privacy Policy.

    I agree
Search articles by DOI, keyword, author or affiliation
Search
Advanced Search
presentation
Oncology Letters
Join Editorial Board Propose a Special Issue
Print ISSN: 1792-1074 Online ISSN: 1792-1082
Journal Cover
July-2026 Volume 32 Issue 1

Full Size Image

Sign up for eToc alerts
Recommend to Library

Journals

International Journal of Molecular Medicine

International Journal of Molecular Medicine

International Journal of Molecular Medicine is an international journal devoted to molecular mechanisms of human disease.

International Journal of Oncology

International Journal of Oncology

International Journal of Oncology is an international journal devoted to oncology research and cancer treatment.

Molecular Medicine Reports

Molecular Medicine Reports

Covers molecular medicine topics such as pharmacology, pathology, genetics, neuroscience, infectious diseases, molecular cardiology, and molecular surgery.

Oncology Reports

Oncology Reports

Oncology Reports is an international journal devoted to fundamental and applied research in Oncology.

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine is an international journal devoted to laboratory and clinical medicine.

Oncology Letters

Oncology Letters

Oncology Letters is an international journal devoted to Experimental and Clinical Oncology.

Biomedical Reports

Biomedical Reports

Explores a wide range of biological and medical fields, including pharmacology, genetics, microbiology, neuroscience, and molecular cardiology.

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

International journal addressing all aspects of oncology research, from tumorigenesis and oncogenes to chemotherapy and metastasis.

World Academy of Sciences Journal

World Academy of Sciences Journal

Multidisciplinary open-access journal spanning biochemistry, genetics, neuroscience, environmental health, and synthetic biology.

International Journal of Functional Nutrition

International Journal of Functional Nutrition

Open-access journal combining biochemistry, pharmacology, immunology, and genetics to advance health through functional nutrition.

International Journal of Epigenetics

International Journal of Epigenetics

Publishes open-access research on using epigenetics to advance understanding and treatment of human disease.

Medicine International

Medicine International

An International Open Access Journal Devoted to General Medicine.

Journal Cover
July-2026 Volume 32 Issue 1

Full Size Image

Sign up for eToc alerts
Recommend to Library

  • Article
  • Citations
    • Cite This Article
    • Download Citation
    • Create Citation Alert
    • Remove Citation Alert
    • Cited By
  • Similar Articles
    • Related Articles (in Spandidos Publications)
    • Similar Articles (Google Scholar)
    • Similar Articles (PubMed)
  • Download PDF
  • Download XML
  • View XML
Article Open Access

Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer

  • Authors:
    • Alper Coskun
    • Ahmet Bilgehan Sahin
    • Selva Kabul
    • Mehmet Emin Dagtekin
    • Seda Sali
    • Buket Erkan Ozmarasali
    • Adem Deligonul
    • Erdem Cubukcu
    • Meral Kurt
    • Gursel Savci
    • Turkkan Evrensel
    • Ismet Yavascaoglu
  • View Affiliations / Copyright

    Affiliations: Department of Medical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Uludag University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey, Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Uludag University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Uludag University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey, Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Uludag University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Uludag University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Uludag University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey
    Copyright: © Coskun et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY 4.0].
  • Article Number: 299
    |
    Published online on: May 18, 2026
       https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2026.15654
  • Expand metrics +
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

This article is mentioned in:


Abstract

Bladder cancer is the ninth most common malignancy worldwide, with urothelial carcinoma (UC) representing the predominant histopathological subtype. UC may present as pure urothelial carcinoma (PUC), or alongside other variant histologies (VHs), with squamous differentiation in UC (SD) being the most frequently observed variant. The present study provides a population‑based insight into the survival outcomes of patients with SD compared with PUC in early‑stage disease. The present retrospective, observational study analyzed pathology reports from all cystectomies (n=632) performed at Uludag University Faculty of Medicine (Bursa, Turkey) between December 2010 and December 2023. A total of 23 patients with SD and 45 patients with PUC were evaluated; all of the patients had pathological stage T2N0 (pT2N0). The median follow‑up period was 5.27 years (range, 0.23‑16.60). Kaplan‑Meier survival analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in disease‑free survival (DFS) or overall survival (OS) between the SD and PUC groups. Univariate Cox regression analysis identified that age at diagnosis was a potential prognostic factor of both DFS and OS. The findings suggest that SD does not significantly affect DFS or OS in patients with pT2N0 UC. However, further prospective, multicenter, large‑scale studies are warranted to validate and expand upon these findings.

Introduction

Bladder cancer (BC) is the ninth most common cancer worldwide (1). According to global data from 2022, ~615,000 new cases were diagnosed, and >220,000 deaths occurred due to BC, with the incidence notably higher in men than in women (2). Based on data from Cancer Statistics 2025, BC ranks as the fourth most common cancer in men and eighth in cancer-related deaths in the United States (US) (3). The median age at diagnosis is 69 years in men and 71 years in women (4,5). Although several risk factors for BC have been identified, cigarette smoking remains the most notable, particularly in Western populations (6). Tobacco smoke contains numerous carcinogens, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and N-nitrosamines, which are implicated in bladder carcinogenesis (7).

From a histopathological perspective, urothelial carcinoma (UC) is the predominant subtype of BC, accounting for ~90% of cases in the US and Western Europe. By contrast, non-urothelial bladder cancer (NUC) is more prevalent in regions such as the Middle East, largely due to the endemic presence of schistosomiasis, an established risk factor (8). In a retrospective analysis of 72,452 patients with UC and NUC in the US, it was found that adenocarcinoma was diagnosed at younger ages, that non-squamous NUCs were more common in males, and that squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) and small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma subtypes were associated with poorer prognoses than UC. The same study reported that >60% of NUC cases were diagnosed at advanced stages, while nearly 80% of UC cases were identified at early stages (9).

UC may present as pure urothelial carcinoma (PUC) or with variant histologies (VHs), including squamous, glandular, micropapillary, trophoblastic, sarcomatoid, nested and neuroendocrine components. Among these, squamous differentiation in UC (SD) is the most common, found in ~20% of UC cases (10,11). SD is characterized histologically by intercellular bridging and keratinization (12). In one study, the incidence of high-stage disease (T3-T4) in patients with SD was 72.3%, compared with 43.1% in patients with PUC (11). Furthermore, nodal involvement was more frequent in patients with diffuse SD (46.2%) than in those with PUC (27%). Certain studies have suggested that SD is associated with a more aggressive clinical course and poorer response to adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT) compared with PUC (13–15). However, evidence on the prognostic impact of SD remains controversial. For example, Wasco et al (16) reported that although VHs, including SD, were associated with higher T stages and more frequent muscle invasion or extravesical extension, they did not significantly affect disease-free survival (DFS). By contrast, another study found that the presence of VHs in UC was associated with worse survival outcomes, particularly with micropapillary, plasmacytoid and small cell variants, while SD demonstrated similar survival to PUC (17). Although SD has been associated with advanced stage and poor prognosis in some studies, its impact in pathological stage T2N0 (pT2N0) UC remains unclear (18–26).

The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical features, treatment response and survival outcomes of patients with pT2N0 UC exhibiting squamous differentiation in comparison with those with PUC. It is hypothesized that the study will contribute to an improved understanding of the clinical course and treatment strategies of pT2N0 UC with SD.

Materials and methods

Study population

The present study is a clinical, observational, retrospective cohort study. Pathology reports of all cystectomy procedures (n=632) performed at Uludag University Faculty of Medicine (Bursa, Turkey) between December 2010 and December 2023 were reviewed retrospectively. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from 115 patients with either SD or PUC and a pathological stage of pT2N0 at cystectomy. The data were obtained from the institutional hospital automation system. This study was approved by the Uludag University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Bursa, Turkey; approval no. 2025/4-26). The inclusion criteria were as follows: i) Patients aged ≥18 years; ii) histopathological diagnosis of UC with or without SD; iii) pathological stage pT2N0 at the time of cystectomy; iv) no evidence of distant metastasis and v) availability of complete clinical and follow-up data. The exclusion criteria were as follows: i) <18 years of age; ii) histological differentiation other than SD; iii) distant metastases at diagnosis; and iv) did not undergo curative surgery.

Data collection

The data were obtained through retrospective review of hospital electronic records and archived clinical files. The following variables were recorded: i) Demographic, clinical and pathological characteristics; ii) smoking history; iii) comorbidities; iv) stage at diagnosis; v) the Bacillus Calmette-Guerin treatment; vi) surgical procedures; vii) adjuvant systemic treatments (CT and/or RT); viii) recurrence status; ix) survival status; and x) last follow-up date.

Histopathological examination

Histopathological evaluation was performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue sections using routine hematoxylin and eosin staining. Tissue samples were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin at room temperature for 24–48 h. Paraffin-embedded sections were cut at a thickness of 4 µm. Hematoxylin and eosin staining was performed at room temperature, with hematoxylin staining for 5 min followed by eosin staining for 2 min. All slides were reviewed by an experienced genitourinary pathologist according to the 2022 World Health Organization classification criteria (27) using light microscopy. Histopathological re-evaluation was performed in a subset of patients (n=69) after the application of the predefined exclusion criteria. Based on the initial pathology reports, 15 patients with SD and 31 patients with PUC were excluded (Fig. 1). The remaining 69 patients underwent review by a genitourinary pathologist. Among these, six patients initially reported as PUC were reclassified as squamous differentiation and subsequently included in the SD group. In addition, one patient with a non-squamous VH (trophoblastic differentiation) was excluded. Only patients with confirmed pT2N0 disease after pathological re-evaluation were included in the final analysis. The study flow diagram illustrating the patient selection process is presented in Fig. 1.

Study flow diagram of patient
selection and histopathological re-evaluation. A total of 632
patients who underwent cystectomy were screened, of whom 115
patients with pT2N0 UC were identified based on initial pathology
reports. After applying predefined exclusion criteria (including
neoadjuvant CT, stage IV disease, missing data, concurrent VHs and
early postoperative mortality), 69 patients underwent
histopathological re-evaluation. Following re-evaluation, 23
patients were classified as having SD and 45 as PUC; one patient
with a non-squamous VH was excluded. pT2N0, pathological stage
T2N0; UC, urothelial carcinoma; VH, variant histology; SD, squamous
differentiation in urothelial carcinoma; PUC, pure urothelial
carcinoma.

Figure 1.

Study flow diagram of patient selection and histopathological re-evaluation. A total of 632 patients who underwent cystectomy were screened, of whom 115 patients with pT2N0 UC were identified based on initial pathology reports. After applying predefined exclusion criteria (including neoadjuvant CT, stage IV disease, missing data, concurrent VHs and early postoperative mortality), 69 patients underwent histopathological re-evaluation. Following re-evaluation, 23 patients were classified as having SD and 45 as PUC; one patient with a non-squamous VH was excluded. pT2N0, pathological stage T2N0; UC, urothelial carcinoma; VH, variant histology; SD, squamous differentiation in urothelial carcinoma; PUC, pure urothelial carcinoma.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 25.0 (IBM Corp.). Categorical variables were summarized as frequencies and percentages, and continuous variables were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation, median and range (minimum-maximum). Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests were used to assess normality of distribution. Comparisons between two independent groups were performed using the independent samples t-test for normally distributed variables and the Mann-Whitney U test for non-normally distributed variables. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and survival curves were generated accordingly. DFS was defined as the time from curative surgery to recurrence, last follow-up or death. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from curative surgery to death or last follow-up. Univariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with survival outcomes. P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.

Results

The median age of the patients was 66 years (range, 43–80 years), the majority were men and the median follow-up duration was 5.27 years (range, 0.23–16.60 years). The most common comorbidity was hypertension, which was present in 37 patients (54.4%). Among the 68 patients included in the present study, the SD group consisted of 23 patients. Comparative analysis revealed no significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics, except for sex. Adjuvant CT was administered to only four patients (two in each group). Given the very limited number of cases, no meaningful comparison or subgroup analysis could be performed. Baseline characteristics of the study population are summarized in Table I.

Table I.

Baseline clinicopathological characteristics of the study population.

Table I.

Baseline clinicopathological characteristics of the study population.

Characteristics (n=68)Squamous differentiation (n=23)Pure urothelial carcinoma (n=45)P-value
Age, median (range)67 (48–77)65 (43–80)0.183
Sex (%) 0.028
  Male18 (78.3)43 (95.6)
  Female5 (21.7)2 (4.4)
Comorbidity (%)
  Hypertension11 (47.8)26 (57.8)0.439
  Diabetes mellitus4 (17.4)7 (15.6)0.847
  IHD3 (13.0)14 (31.1)0.106
  Asthma/COPD3 (13.0)12 (26.7)0.203
Smoking statusa, n (%) 0.191
  Yes7 (30.4)19 (42.2)
  No5 (21.7)3 (6.7)
  Missing11 (47.8)23 (51.1)
Smoking (pack/year), mean ± SD39.0±6.739.8±3.70.918
De novo pT2, n (%)15 (65.2)34 (75.6)0.372
BCG, n (%)2 (8.7)6 (13.3)0.577
Type of surgery, n (%) 0.377
  RCP18 (78.3)39 (86.7)
  RC5 (21.7)6 (13.3)
Adjuvant chemotherapy, n (%)2 (8.7)2 (4.4)0.484
Follow-up duration, years mean ± SD5.76±0.756.49±0.680.697

a Percentages are calculated based on available data (excluding missing values). BCG, Bacillus Calmette-Guérin; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; IHD, ischemic heart disease; RC, radical cystectomy; RCP, radical cystoprostatectomy.

Recurrence occurred in seven patients (30.4%) in the SD group and 10 patients (22.2%) in the PUC group. A total of 11 patients (47.8%) in the SD group and 21 patients (46.7%) in the PUC group died. The median DFS was 5.61 years [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63–10.59] in the SD group and 9.17 years (95% CI, 1.64–16.70) in the PUC group (P=0.998). The median OS was 5.61 years (95% CI, 0.58–10.64) in the SD group and 10.15 years (95% CI, 3.49–16.82) in the PUC group (P=0.795). Kaplan-Meier survival curves are presented in Figs. 2 and 3.

Kaplan-Meier curve for disease-free
survival according to histopathological subtype.(SD vs. PUC;
log-rank P=0.998). SD, squamous differentiation in urothelial
carcinoma; PUC, pure urothelial carcinoma; HR, hazard ratio; CI,
confidence interval.

Figure 2.

Kaplan-Meier curve for disease-free survival according to histopathological subtype.(SD vs. PUC; log-rank P=0.998). SD, squamous differentiation in urothelial carcinoma; PUC, pure urothelial carcinoma; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Kaplan-Meier curve for overall
survival according to histopathological subtype (SD vs. PUC;
log-rank P=0.795). SD, squamous differentiation in urothelial
carcinoma; PUC, pure urothelial carcinoma; HR, hazard ratio; CI,
confidence interval.

Figure 3.

Kaplan-Meier curve for overall survival according to histopathological subtype (SD vs. PUC; log-rank P=0.795). SD, squamous differentiation in urothelial carcinoma; PUC, pure urothelial carcinoma; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Univariate Cox regression analysis was performed to identify potential prognostic factors associated with survival outcomes. In the univariate Cox regression analysis, age at diagnosis emerged as a potential prognostic factor of both DFS and OS. The detailed results of the univariate Cox regression analysis for DFS and OS are presented in Table II.

Table II.

Univariate cox regression analysis of factors associated with DFS and OS.

Table II.

Univariate cox regression analysis of factors associated with DFS and OS.

A, DFS

95% CI

VariableHRLowerUpperP-value
Agea1.0891.0291.1520.003
Sexb0.2280.0311.6670.145
Smoking statusc2.3250.51710.4480.271
Smoking (pack/year)1.0000.9661.0350.994
Pathological subtyped0.9990.4862.0570.998
De novo pT2e0.5580.2741.1390.109
BCGf0.6310.1922.0690.447
Adjuvant CTg0.3050.0422.2380.243
B, OS

95% CI

VariableHRLowerUpperP-value

Agea1.0991.0361.1670.002
Sexb0.2510.0341.8400.174
Smoking statusc1.9700.4299.0380.383
Smoking (pack/year)0.9980.9611.0370.920
Pathological subtyped0.9080.4361.8910.796
De novo pT2e0.5190.2511.0740.077
BCGf0.7020.2132.3110.560
Adjuvant CTg0.3260.0442.3980.271

{ label (or @symbol) needed for fn[@id='tfn2-ol-32-1-15654'] } Reference groups:

a Age <65;

b male sex;

c no smoking;

d squamous differentiation in urothelial carcinoma,

e Ta/T1 disease at diagnosis;

f no BCG;

g no CT. BCG, Bacillus Calmette-Guérin; CI, confidence interval; CT, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; DFS, disease-free survival; OS, overall survival.

Discussion

In the present study, no significant differences in survival were observed between patients with SD and those with PUC. This finding was observed in a highly selected cohort of patients who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, had no distant metastasis and had pT2N0 disease.

Transcriptomic profiling studies have demonstrated that BC can be classified into molecular subtypes, including luminal and basal-like tumors (28). Basal tumors are more frequently associated with squamous features and tend to have a more aggressive clinical course, whereas luminal tumors are linked to a more favorable prognosis and distinct therapeutic targets (28,29). It has also been reported that basal subtype tumors may have an improved response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), while luminal tumors may benefit more from fibroblast growth factor receptor 3- and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-targeted therapies (30). Moreover, SqCC has been associated with responsiveness to epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted agents (29).

Within this biological framework, the clinical importance of squamous differentiation remains to be clarified. In this context, it is important to distinguish SD from SqCC, which is defined by complete squamous differentiation (30). SD is considered an intermediate phenotype between SqCC and UC based on immunohistochemical characteristics (31). While treatment responses and prognostic implications have been relatively well described for SqCC, data on the clinicopathological features and survival outcomes of patients with SD remain limited, particularly in early-stage disease.

The patient population in the present study represents a highly specific and distinct cohort. All patients included had a diagnosis of either SD or PUC, a pathological stage of T2, no lymph node involvement or distant metastasis, had not received neoadjuvant systemic therapy, and underwent cystectomy. To the best of our knowledge, no prior study in the literature has examined a cohort with such narrowly defined inclusion criteria. The majority of studies in the literature involve broader patient populations, including varying pathological stages and the presence of nodal or distant metastases, which may explain discrepancies in reported outcomes. For example, Minato et al (18) evaluated clinical characteristics and survival outcomes in 101 patients with cT2-T4aN0M0 disease who underwent radical cystectomy (PUC, n=81; SD, n=20). Unlike the present study, the multivariate analysis identified the presence of squamous differentiation as a factor negatively affecting OS. However, the cohort included a higher proportion of advanced-stage patients, with 60% of the SD group and 30.9% of the PUC group diagnosed with pathological stage T3 or higher, and nodal positivity reported in 45 and 21% of cases, respectively. Notably, only eight patients in the SD group had stage ≤pT2 disease (18). Izard et al (19) conducted another large study including 178 patients with SqCC, 325 with SD and 2,884 with PUC. Similar to the present study, a higher proportion of female patients was noted in the SD group. However, in contrast to the findings of the present study, their cohort included ~40% of patients with T3 stage disease and 25% with lymph node positivity. Furthermore, T3 stage disease was more common in the SD and SqCC groups, while T1 disease was more prevalent in the PUC group. The 5-year OS rates were reported as 34% for SD and 28% for PUC. In their multivariate analysis, factors that were independently associated with OS included age ≥70 years, advanced T and N stages and positive surgical margins. In the present univariate analysis, age at diagnosis was associated with both DFS and OS. Other variables could not be compared due to the homogeneity of the present cohort, whereby all patients had pT2N0 disease with negative surgical margins (19). Several studies have reported findings consistent with the present study, demonstrating no notable survival difference between SD and PUC following cystectomy (20–24). By contrast, certain studies have suggested a negative prognostic impact of squamous differentiation, particularly in cohorts including more advanced-stage disease (18,25). These discrepancies may largely be explained by differences in patient selection, particularly with respect to pathological stage and nodal involvement.

Previous studies have suggested that patients with progressive T2 disease following non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer may have worse oncological outcomes compared with those with de novo disease (32–34). By contrast, the present study did not demonstrate a significant difference between these groups, although this finding should be interpreted with caution due to the limited sample size.

In a study evaluating cancer-specific survival (CSS) and OS in 117,275 patients with BC using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 to 2015, age ≥75 years at diagnosis was identified as an independent factor associated with poorer CSS and OS outcomes (35). Similarly, the present study demonstrated that age ≥65 years at the time of diagnosis was a potential risk factor negatively impacting both DFS and OS.

In the study conducted by Laymon et al (36) the clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes of 223 patients with SD and 318 patients with SqCC were evaluated. The findings showed that lymph node involvement and extravesical extension were more common among patients with SD, and the 5-year recurrence-free survival was significantly worse in the SD group compared with the SqCC group (36). By contrast, in the present study a comparative analysis between patients with SD and those with PUC was conducted, allowing specific examination of the prognostic implications of squamous differentiation within the context of UC.

Smoking is a well-established risk factor for BC and has been associated with more aggressive tumor biology and VHs, including SD (37,38). In the present study, smoking status was comparable between groups and was not associated with survival outcomes, possibly due to the limited sample size.

Notably, a significant difference in sex distribution was observed between the SD and PUC groups in the present study. Although definitive evidence is lacking, previous studies have suggested that VHs, including SD and SqCC, may be relatively more frequent in women compared with PUC, potentially due to differences in carcinogen exposure, hormonal factors and delays in diagnosis (39,40). The findings of the present study appear to be consistent with these observations. However, this result should be interpreted with caution given the relatively small sample size and the retrospective design of the study.

The present study had several limitations. The most notable is its single-center, retrospective design and relatively small sample size, particularly in the SD group, which may have limited the statistical power to detect significant differences, thereby increasing the risk of a type II error. Additionally, only four patients received adjuvant CT, and none received ICIs, limiting the ability to evaluate the impact of adjuvant treatment on survival outcomes. The exclusion of patients who received neoadjuvant CT further restricted the generalizability of the findings. Another important limitation is the lack of quantitative assessment of the extent of squamous differentiation. Although histopathological re-evaluation was performed by a dedicated genitourinary pathologist, the available specimens and pathology reports did not include a standardized or reproducible quantification of the squamous component. Therefore, the prognostic impact of the percentage of squamous differentiation was not reliably assessed. Future prospective studies with standardized pathological reporting are needed to clarify this issue. Finally, multivariate Cox regression analysis was not performed due to the limited number of events. Therefore, only univariate analysis was considered appropriate.

In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that the presence of squamous differentiation does not impact DFS or OS in patients with pT2N0 UC who underwent cystectomy without prior neoadjuvant treatment or evidence of metastasis. Although existing literature presents conflicting results, the findings align with the majority of studies suggesting no prognostic difference between SD and PUC in this patient population. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution and may not be generalizable to patients with more advanced pathological stages, nodal involvement or those receiving neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Larger, prospective, multi-center studies are warranted to establish more definitive conclusions.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Funding: No funding was received.

Availability of data and materials

The data generated in the present study may be requested from the corresponding author.

Authors' contributions

AC, TE and IY conceptualized the study. AC, ABS, SK, MED and EC performed the experiments. MED, AC, ABS and AD analyzed the data. SS and BEO contributed to data interpretation and critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. MK and GS performed study validation, contributed to retrospective clinical data collection and verification, and critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. SK, SS, AD, TE and IY obtained the resources. AC, SK, MED, SS, BEO, MK and GS contributed to clinical data collection and organization. AC and ABS wrote the original draft. AC, ABS and EC reviewed and edited the manuscript. AD, MK and GS constructed the figures. AC, ABS, TE and IY supervised the study. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. AC and ABS confirm the authenticity of all the raw data.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Uludag University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Bursa, Turkey; approval no. 2025/4-26; date: February 19, 2025). Due to the retrospective design of the study, the requirement for informed consent was waived by the ethics committee.

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1 

Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Soerjomataram I and Jemal A: Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 74:229–263. 2024.PubMed/NCBI

2 

Safiri S, Kolahi AA and Naghavi M; Global Burden of Disease Bladder Cancer Collaborators, : Global, regional and national burden of bladder cancer and its attributable risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. BMJ Glob Health. 6:e0041282021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

Siegel RL, Kratzer TB, Giaquinto AN, Sung H and Jemal A: Cancer statistics, 2025. CA Cancer J Clin. 75:10–45. 2025.PubMed/NCBI

4 

Lynch CF and Cohen MB: Urinary system. Cancer. 75 (1 Suppl):S316–S329. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar

5 

Scosyrev E, Noyes K, Feng C and Messing E: Sex and racial differences in bladder cancer presentation and mortality in the US. Cancer. 115:68–74. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Jubber I, Ong S, Bukavina L, Black PC, Compérat E, Kamat AM, Kiemeney L, Lawrentschuk N, Lerner SP, Meeks JJ, et al: Epidemiology of bladder cancer in 2023: A systematic review of risk factors. Eur Urol. 84:176–190. 2023. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

7 

Hecht SS: Cigarette smoking: Cancer risks, carcinogens, and mechanisms. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 391:603–613. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

8 

Amin HAA, Kobaisi MH and Samir RM: Schistosomiasis and bladder cancer in Egypt: Truths and Myths. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 7:4023–4029. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

9 

Martin JW, Jefferson FA, Huang M, Sung JM, Chang J, Piranviseh K, Ziogas A, Anton-Culver H and Youssef RF: A california cancer registry analysis of urothelial and non-urothelial bladder cancer subtypes: Epidemiology, treatment, and survival. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 18:e330–e336. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

10 

Lopez-Beltran A and Cheng L: Histologic variants of urothelial carcinoma: Differential diagnosis and clinical implications. Hum Pathol. 37:1371–1388. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

11 

Liu Y, Bui MM and Xu B: Urothelial carcinoma with squamous differentiation ıs associated with high tumor stage and pelvic lymph-node metastasis. Cancer Control. 24:78–82. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

12 

Gellert LL, Warrick J and Al-Ahmadie HA: Urothelial carcinoma with squamous differentiation-the pathologists' perspective. Urol Oncol. 33:437–443. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

13 

Billis A, Schenka AA, Ramos CC, Carneiro LT and Araújo V: Squamous and/or glandular differentiation in urothelial carcinoma: Prevalence and significance in transurethral resections of the bladder. Int Urol Nephrol. 33:631–633. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Logothetis CJ, Johnson DE, Chong C, Dexeus FH, Sella A, Ogden S, Smith T, Swanson DA, Babaian RJ, Wishnow KI, et al: Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin chemotherapy for bladder cancer: An update. J Clin Oncol. 6:1590–1596. 1988. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

15 

Martin JE, Jenkins BJ, Zuk RJ, Blandy JP and Baithun SI: Clinical importance of squamous metaplasia in invasive transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. J Clin Pathol. 42:250–253. 1989. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

16 

Wasco MJ, Daignault S, Zhang Y, Kunju LP, Kinnaman M, Braun T, Lee CT and Shah RB: Urothelial carcinoma with divergent histologic differentiation (mixed histologic features) predicts the presence of locally advanced bladder cancer when detected at transurethral resection. Urology. 70:69–74. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

17 

Mori K, Abufaraj M, Mostafaei H, Quhal F, Karakiewicz PI, Briganti A, Kimura S, Egawa S and Shariat SF: A systematic review and meta-analysis of variant histology in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder treated with radical cystectomy. J Urol. 204:1129–1140. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

18 

Minato A, Noguchi H, Tomisaki I, Fukuda A, Kubo T, Nakayama T and Fujimoto N: Clinical significance of squamous differentiation in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Cancer Control. 25:10732748188002692018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

19 

Izard JP, Siemens DR, Mackillop WJ, Wei X, Leveridge MJ, Berman DM, Peng Y and Booth CM: Outcomes of squamous histology in bladder cancer: A population-based study. Urol Oncol. 33:425.e7–e13. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

20 

Monn MF, Kaimakliotis HZ, Pedrosa JA, Cary KC, Bihrle R, Cheng L and Koch MO: Contemporary bladder cancer: Variant histology may be a significant driver of disease. Urol Oncol. 33:18.e15–e18.e20. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Kim SP, Frank I, Cheville JC, Thompson RH, Weight CJ, Thapa P and Boorjian SA: The impact of squamous and glandular differentiation on survival after radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma. J Urol. 188:405–409. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

22 

Mitra AP, Bartsch CC, Bartsch G Jr, Miranda G, Skinner EC and Daneshmand S: Does presence of squamous and glandular differentiation in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder at cystectomy portend poor prognosis? An intensive case-control analysis. Urol Oncol. 32:117–127. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

Pereira JN, Reis JD, Braga I, Freitas R, Moreira da Silva V, Magalhães S, Lobo F and Morais A: Variant histologies of urothelial carcinoma: Does it change the survival outcomes in patients managed with radical cystectomy? Arch Ital Urol Androl. 94:138–143. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Xylinas E, Rink M, Robinson BD, Lotan Y, Babjuk M, Brisuda A, Green DA, Kluth LA, Pycha A, Fradet Y, et al: Impact of histological variants on oncological outcomes of patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder treated with radical cystectomy. Eur J Cancer. 49:1889–1897. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

25 

Antunes AA, Nesrallah LJ, Dall'Oglio MF, Maluf CE, Camara C, Leite KR and Srougi M: The role of squamous differentiation in patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder treated with radical cystectomy. Int Braz J Urol. 33:339–346. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Chen Q, Li L, Wang G, Hu J, Sun T and Fu B: Do histological variants in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder portend poor prognosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 8:48263–48271. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

27 

WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board, . Urinary and male genital tumours. WHO classification of tumours. 5th edition. volume 8. International Agency for Research on Cancer; Lyon: 2022, https://publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Who-Classification-Of-Tumours/Urinary-And-Male-Genital-Tumours-2022April 24–2026

28 

Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, . Comprehensive molecular characterization of urothelial bladder carcinoma. Nature. 507:315–322. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

29 

Choi W, Porten S, Kim S, Willis D, Plimack ER, Hoffman-Censits J, Roth B, Cheng T, Tran M, Lee IL, et al: Identification of distinct basal and luminal subtypes of muscle-invasive bladder cancer with different sensitivities to frontline chemotherapy. Cancer Cell. 25:152–165. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

30 

Agrawal P, Rostom M, Alam R, Florissi I, Biles M, Rodriguez K, Hahn NM, Johnson BA III, Matoso A, Smith A, et al: Clinicopathologic and survival after cystectomy outcomes in squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 21:631–638.e1. 2023. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

31 

Gaisa NT, Braunschweig T, Reimer N, Bornemann J, Eltze E, Siegert S, Toma M, Villa L, Hartmann A and Knuechel R: Different immunohistochemical and ultrastructural phenotypes of squamous differentiation in bladder cancer. Virchows Arch. 458:301–312. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

32 

Moschini M, Sharma V, Dell'oglio P, Cucchiara V, Gandaglia G, Cantiello F, Zattoni F, Pellucchi F, Briganti A, Damiano R, et al: Comparing long-term outcomes of primary and progressive carcinoma invading bladder muscle after radical cystectomy. BJU Int. 117:604–610. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

33 

Kayama E, Kikuchi E, Fukumoto K, Shirotake S, Miyazaki Y, Hakozaki K, Kaneko G, Yoshimine S, Tanaka N, Takahiro M, et al: History of non-muscle-ınvasive bladder cancer may have a worse prognostic ımpact in cT2-4aN0M0 bladder cancer patients treated with radical cystectomy. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 16:e969–e976. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

34 

Vlaming M, Kiemeney LALM and van der Heijden AG: Survival after radical cystectomy: Progressive versus de novo muscle invasive bladder cancer. Cancer Treat Res Commun. 25:1002642020.PubMed/NCBI

35 

Lin W, Pan X, Zhang C, Ye B and Song J: Impact of age at diagnosis of bladder cancer on survival: A surveillance, epidemiology, and end results-based study 2004–2015. Cancer Control. 30:107327482311523222023. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

36 

Laymon M, Mosbah A, Hashem A, Mahmoud O, Harraz AM, Elsawy AA and Abol-Enein H: Oncologic outcomes of squamous cell carcinoma versus urothelial carcinoma with squamous differentiation after radical cystectomy for bladder carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 20:148–154. 2022. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

37 

Alfred Witjes J, Max Bruins H, Carrión A, Cathomas R, Compérat E, Efstathiou JA, Fietkau R, Gakis G, Lorch A, Martini A, et al: European association of urology guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: Summary of the 2023 guidelines. Eur Urol. 85:17–31. 2024. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

38 

Freedman ND, Silverman DT, Hollenbeck AR, Schatzkin A and Abnet CC: Association between smoking and risk of bladder cancer among men and women. JAMA. 306:737–745. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

39 

Mungan NA, Kiemeney LA, van Dijck JA, van der Poel HG and Witjes JA: Gender differences in stage distribution of bladder cancer. Urology. 55:368–371. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

40 

Marks P, Soave A, Shariat SF, Fajkovic H, Fisch M and Rink M: Female with bladder cancer: What and why is there a difference? Transl Androl Urol. 5:668–682. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

  • Abstract
  • View
  • Download
  • Twitter
Copy and paste a formatted citation
Spandidos Publications style
Coskun A, Sahin AB, Kabul S, Dagtekin ME, Sali S, Ozmarasali BE, Deligonul A, Cubukcu E, Kurt M, Savci G, Savci G, et al: Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer. Oncol Lett 32: 299, 2026.
APA
Coskun, A., Sahin, A.B., Kabul, S., Dagtekin, M.E., Sali, S., Ozmarasali, B.E. ... Yavascaoglu, I. (2026). Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer. Oncology Letters, 32, 299. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2026.15654
MLA
Coskun, A., Sahin, A. B., Kabul, S., Dagtekin, M. E., Sali, S., Ozmarasali, B. E., Deligonul, A., Cubukcu, E., Kurt, M., Savci, G., Evrensel, T., Yavascaoglu, I."Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer". Oncology Letters 32.1 (2026): 299.
Chicago
Coskun, A., Sahin, A. B., Kabul, S., Dagtekin, M. E., Sali, S., Ozmarasali, B. E., Deligonul, A., Cubukcu, E., Kurt, M., Savci, G., Evrensel, T., Yavascaoglu, I."Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer". Oncology Letters 32, no. 1 (2026): 299. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2026.15654
Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Coskun A, Sahin AB, Kabul S, Dagtekin ME, Sali S, Ozmarasali BE, Deligonul A, Cubukcu E, Kurt M, Savci G, Savci G, et al: Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer. Oncol Lett 32: 299, 2026.
APA
Coskun, A., Sahin, A.B., Kabul, S., Dagtekin, M.E., Sali, S., Ozmarasali, B.E. ... Yavascaoglu, I. (2026). Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer. Oncology Letters, 32, 299. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2026.15654
MLA
Coskun, A., Sahin, A. B., Kabul, S., Dagtekin, M. E., Sali, S., Ozmarasali, B. E., Deligonul, A., Cubukcu, E., Kurt, M., Savci, G., Evrensel, T., Yavascaoglu, I."Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer". Oncology Letters 32.1 (2026): 299.
Chicago
Coskun, A., Sahin, A. B., Kabul, S., Dagtekin, M. E., Sali, S., Ozmarasali, B. E., Deligonul, A., Cubukcu, E., Kurt, M., Savci, G., Evrensel, T., Yavascaoglu, I."Prognostic significance of squamous differentiation in pT2N0 urothelial bladder cancer". Oncology Letters 32, no. 1 (2026): 299. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2026.15654
Follow us
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
About
  • Spandidos Publications
  • Careers
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
How can we help?
  • Help
  • Live Chat
  • Contact
  • Email to our Support Team