Long-term oncologic data on patients undergoing robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for non-metastatic bladder cancer (BCa) are limited. The purpose of this study is to describe long-term... Show moreLong-term oncologic data on patients undergoing robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for non-metastatic bladder cancer (BCa) are limited. The purpose of this study is to describe long-term oncologic outcomes of patients receiving robotic radical cystectomy at a high-volume European Institution. We analyzed data of 107 patients treated with RARC between 2003 and 2012 at a high-volume robotic center. Clinical, pathologic, and survival data at the latest follow-up were collected. Clinical recurrence (CR)-free survival, cancer-specific mortality (CSM)-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were plotted using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Cox proportional hazard models investigated predictors of CR and CSM. Competing-risk regressions were utilized to depict cumulative incidences of death from BCa and death from other causes after RARC at long term. Pathologic nonorgan-confined BCa was found in 40% of patients, and 7 (7%) patients had positive soft tissue surgical margins. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) number of nodes removed was 11 (6, 14), and 26% of patients had pN + disease. Median (IQR) follow-up for survivors was 123 (117, 149) months. The 12-year CR-free, CSM-free and overall survival were 55% (95% confidence interval [CI] 44%, 65%), 62% (95% CI 50%, 72%), and 34% (95% CI 24%, 44%), respectively. Nodal involvement on final pathology was associated with poor prognosis on multivariable competing risk analysis. The cumulative incidence of non-cancer death exceeded that of death from BCa after approximately ten years after RARC. We provided relevant data on oncologic outcomes of RARC at a high-volume robotic center, with acceptable rates of clinical recurrence and cancer-specific survival at long-term. In patients treated with RARC, the cumulative incidence of death from causes other than BCa is non-negligible, and should be taken into consideration for post-operative follow-up. Show less
Witjes, J.A.; Babjuk, M.; Bellmunt, J.; Bruins, H.M.; Reijke, T.M. de; Santis, M. de; ... ; Horwich, A. 2020
Background: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.Objective: To... Show moreBackground: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.Objective: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.Design: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference.Setting: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference.Participants: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), and 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as >= 70% agreement and <= 15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).Results and limitations: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.Conclusions: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder canceir management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach.Patient summary: This report summarises findings from an international, multistake-holder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available. (C) 2019 European Society of Medical Oncology and European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Show less
Horwich, A.; Babjuk, M.; Bellmunt, J.; Bruins, H.M.; Reijke, T.M. de; Santis, M. de; ... ; Witjes, J.A. 2019
Background: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.Objective: To... Show moreBackground: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.Objective: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.Design: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference.Setting: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference.Participants: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as >= 70% agreement and <= 15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).Results and limitations: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.Conclusions: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach. Show less