No abstract

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Bladder Cancer focuses on the clinical presentation and workup of suspected bladder cancer, treatment of non–muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer, and treatment of metastatic urothelial bladder cancer because important updates have recently been made to these sections. Some important updates include recommendations for optimal treatment of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the event of a bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) shortage and details about biomarker testing for advanced or metastatic disease. The systemic therapy recommendations for second-line or subsequent therapies have also been revised. Treatment and management of muscle-invasive, nonmetastatic disease is covered in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include treatment of nonurothelial histologies and recommendations for nonbladder urinary tract cancers such as upper tract urothelial carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma of the prostate, and primary carcinoma of the urethra.

OverviewAn estimated 79,030 new cases of urinary bladder cancer (60,490 men and 18,540 women) will be diagnosed in the United States in 2017 and approximately 16,870 deaths (12,240 men and 4630 women) will occur. Please NoteThe NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines Disclosures for the NCCN Bladder Cancer PanelAt the beginning of each NCCN Guidelines panel meeting, panel members review all potential conflicts of interest. NCCN, in keeping with its commitment to public transparency, publishes these disclosures for panel members, staff, and NCCN itself.Individual disclosures for the NCCN Bladder Cancer Panel members can be found on page 1267 (The most recent version of these guidelines and accompanying disclosures are available on the NCCN Web site at NCCN.org.)These guidelines are also available on the Internet. For the latest update, visit NCCN.org.

Background The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BCa) was established primarily with methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC), with complete response rates (pT0) as high as 38%. However, because of the comparable efficacy with better tolerability of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in patients with metastatic disease, GC has become the most commonly used regimen in the neoadjuvant setting. Objective We aimed to assess real-world pathologic response rates to NAC with different regimens in a large, multicenter cohort. Design, setting, and participants Data were collected retrospectively at 19 centers on patients with clinical cT2–4aN0M0 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder who received at least three cycles of NAC, followed by radical cystectomy (RC), between 2000 and 2013. Intervention NAC and RC Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The primary outcome was pathologic stage at cystectomy. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to determine factors predictive of pT0N0 and ≤pT1N0 stages. Results and limitations Data were collected on 935 patients who met inclusion criteria. GC was used in the majority of the patients (n = 602; 64.4%), followed by MVAC (n = 183; 19.6%) and other regimens (n = 144; 15.4%). The rates of pT0N0 and ≤pT1N0 pathologic response were 22.7% and 40.8%, respectively. The rate of pT0N0 disease for patients receiving GC was 23.9%, compared with 24.5% for MVAC (p = 0.2). There was no difference between MVAC and GC in pT0N0 on multivariable analysis (odds ratio: 0.89 [95% confidence interval, 0.61–1.34]; p = 0.6). Conclusions Response rates to NAC were lower than those reported in prospective randomized trials, and we did not discern a difference between MVAC and GC. Without any evidence from randomized prospective trials, the best NAC regimen for invasive BCa remains to be determined. Patient summary There was no apparent difference in the response rates to the two most common presurgical chemotherapy regimens for patients with bladder cancer.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Bladder Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with bladder cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss important updates to the 2018 version of the guidelines, including implications of the 8th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual on treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer and incorporating newly approved immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies into treatment options for patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease.

No abstract

Objective To assess the influence of patient preferences and urologist recommendations in treatment decisions for clinically localized prostate cancer. Methods We enrolled 257 men with clinically localized prostate cancer (PSA < 20; Gleason 6 or 7) seen by urologists (primarily residents and fellows) in 4 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. We measured patients’ baseline preferences prior to their urology appointments, including initial treatment preference, cancer-related anxiety, and interest in sex. In longitudinal follow-up, we determined which treatment patients received. We used hierarchical logistic regression to determine the factors that predicted treatment received (active treatment vs. active surveillance) and urologist recommendations. We also conducted a directed content analysis of recorded clinical encounters to determine if urologists discussed patients’ interest in sex. Results Patients’ initial treatment preferences did not predict receipt of active treatment versus surveillance (Δχ2 (4) = 3.67, p = .45). Instead, receipt of active treatment was predicted primarily by urologists’ recommendations (Δχ2(2) = 32.81 p < .001). Urologists’ recommendations, in turn, were influenced heavily by medical factors (age and Gleason score) but unrelated to patient preferences (Δχ2 (6) = 0, p = 1). Urologists rarely discussed patients’ interest in sex (< 15% of appointments). Conclusions Patients’ treatment decisions were based largely upon urologists’ recommendations, which, in turn, were based on medical factors (age and Gleason score) and not on patients’ personal views of the relative pros and cons of treatment alternatives.

Our results suggest that compared to final pathology, biopsy of small renal masses accurately informs an algorithm incorporating size and histological risk group that directs the management of small renal masses.