BACKGROUND: Cystectomy delay >90 days after a diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) adversely affects pathologic stage and survival outcomes in patients who undergo primary surgery. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), the impact of the timing of cystectomy delivery on these outcomes is uncertain. Poor communication between urologic and medical oncologists can result in cystectomy delay after systemic treatment. The authors of this report hypothesized that a delay in cystectomy delivery after NAC is associated with adverse survival outcomes. METHODS: An eligible cohort of 153 patients with MIBC received NAC and underwent radical cystectomy between 1990 and 2007. At the authors' institution, the genitourinary team strives to schedule patients for surgery at the time of initial evaluation or after their first chemotherapy cycle. Clinicopathologic characteristics, including timing of cystectomy, chemotherapy delivery, vital status, and reasons for excessive surgical delay, were analyzed retrospectively using an institutional database. A Cox proportional regression model was used to test the association between the timing of cystectomy delivery and survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up for all patients was 3.6 years. The median time to cystectomy was 16.6 weeks and 6.9 weeks from the first and last day of NAC, respectively. In multivariate analyses, the timing of cystectomy delivery from the termination of NAC did not significantly alter the risk of survival. The most common reason for cystectomy delivery beyond 10 weeks (28 patients; 18%) was procedural scheduling. CONCLUSIONS: Cystectomy delivery within 10 weeks after NAC did not compromise patient survival and, thus, provided a reasonable window for patient recovery and surgical intervention.
BACKGROUND: Cystectomy delay >90 days after a diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) adversely affects pathologic stage and survival outcomes in patients who undergo primary surgery. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), the impact of the timing of cystectomy delivery on these outcomes is uncertain. Poor communication between urologic and medical oncologists can result in cystectomy delay after systemic treatment. The authors of this report hypothesized that a delay in cystectomy delivery after NAC is associated with adverse survival outcomes. METHODS: An eligible cohort of 153 patients with MIBC received NAC and underwent radical cystectomy between 1990 and 2007. At the authors' institution, the genitourinary team strives to schedule patients for surgery at the time of initial evaluation or after their first chemotherapy cycle. Clinicopathologic characteristics, including timing of cystectomy, chemotherapy delivery, vital status, and reasons for excessive surgical delay, were analyzed retrospectively using an institutional database. A Cox proportional regression model was used to test the association between the timing of cystectomy delivery and survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up for all patients was 3.6 years. The median time to cystectomy was 16.6 weeks and 6.9 weeks from the first and last day of NAC, respectively. In multivariate analyses, the timing of cystectomy delivery from the termination of NAC did not significantly alter the risk of survival. The most common reason for cystectomy delivery beyond 10 weeks (28 patients; 18%) was procedural scheduling. CONCLUSIONS: Cystectomy delivery within 10 weeks after NAC did not compromise patient survival and, thus, provided a reasonable window for patient recovery and surgical intervention.
Authors: Uros Milenkovic; Murat Akand; Lisa Moris; Liesbeth Demaegd; Tim Muilwijk; Youri Bekhuis; Annouschka Laenen; Ben Van Cleynenbreugel; Wouter Everaerts; Hein Van Poppel; Herlinde Dumez; Maarten Albersen; Steven Joniau Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ming Yin; Monika Joshi; Richard P Meijer; Michael Glantz; Sheldon Holder; Harold A Harvey; Matthew Kaag; Elisabeth E Fransen van de Putte; Simon Horenblas; Joseph J Drabick Journal: Oncologist Date: 2016-04-06
Authors: Girish S Kulkarni; Peter C Black; Srikala S Sridhar; Anil Kapoor; Alexandre R Zlotta; Bobby Shayegan; Ricardo A Rendon; Peter Chung; Theodorus van der Kwast; Nimira Alimohamed; Yves Fradet; Wassim Kassouf Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Tracy L Rose; Allison M Deal; Ethan Basch; Paul A Godley; W Kimryn Rathmell; William Y Kim; Young E Whang; Mary W Dunn; Andrew Wang; Ronald C Chen; Matthew E Nielsen; Raj S Pruthi; Eric M Wallen; Michael E Woods; Angela B Smith; Matthew I Milowsky Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2015-06-27 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Jo-An Seah; Normand Blais; Scott North; Yasmin Rahim; Dean Ruether; Peter C Black; Alexandre R Zlotta; Lori Wood; Srikala S Sridhar Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2013 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Charles C Peyton; Dominic Tang; Richard R Reich; Mounsif Azizi; Juan Chipollini; Julio M Pow-Sang; Brandon Manley; Philippe E Spiess; Michael A Poch; Wade J Sexton; Mayer Fishman; Jingsong Zhang; Scott M Gilbert Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Wassim Kassouf; Armen Aprikian; Peter Black; Girish Kulkarni; Jonathan Izawa; Libni Eapen; Adrian Fairey; Alan So; Scott North; Ricardo Rendon; Srikala S Sridhar; Tarik Alam; Fadi Brimo; Normand Blais; Chris Booth; Joseph Chin; Peter Chung; Darrel Drachenberg; Yves Fradet; Michael Jewett; Ron Moore; Chris Morash; Bobby Shayegan; Geoffrey Gotto; Neil Fleshner; Fred Saad; D Robert Siemens Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2016-02-08 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Hamed Ahmadi; James E Montie; Alon Z Weizer; Todd Morgan; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Cheryl T Lee Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: David C Johnson; Matthew E Nielsen; Jonathan Matthews; Michael E Woods; Eric M Wallen; Raj S Pruthi; Matthew I Milowsky; Angela B Smith Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 5.588