OBJECTIVE: To analyze trends in perioperative chemotherapy and optimize use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for bladder cancer. METHODS: From 2005-2012, 284 consecutive patients underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy at our facility. Patients with disease ≥ T2 and nodal involvement and positive surgical margins were reviewed and considered candidates for referral to medical oncology for chemotherapy. The study was conducted in two phases: phase 1 included 242 consecutive patients between 2005 and 2011, and phase 2 analyzed the effect of changes in 42 patients during a 1-year period (2011-2012). RESULTS: In phase 1, 148 patients (61%) were candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Consultation for NAC was sought for 44 patients (29%), and 104 (71%) did not receive consultation. Of the 44 patients, 36% received NAC, 7% refused, 32% were recommended for immediate cystectomy, and 25% did not receive NAC for other reasons. Phase 2 was more stringent, with a multidisciplinary approach. Significant improvement in referral and NAC use was seen. About 78% vs 30% of patients were seen by medical oncology for consideration of NAC before robot-assisted radical cystectomy and 71% vs 36% received NAC compared with phase 1. The NAC utilization rate improved from 10.8% to 55% over 1 year with a diligent multidisciplinary approach. Medical comorbidities were the main reason for patients not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (AC; 30% and 33%). CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary approach and coordination of services can help optimize the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for bladder cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze trends in perioperative chemotherapy and optimize use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for bladder cancer. METHODS: From 2005-2012, 284 consecutive patients underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy at our facility. Patients with disease ≥ T2 and nodal involvement and positive surgical margins were reviewed and considered candidates for referral to medical oncology for chemotherapy. The study was conducted in two phases: phase 1 included 242 consecutive patients between 2005 and 2011, and phase 2 analyzed the effect of changes in 42 patients during a 1-year period (2011-2012). RESULTS: In phase 1, 148 patients (61%) were candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Consultation for NAC was sought for 44 patients (29%), and 104 (71%) did not receive consultation. Of the 44 patients, 36% received NAC, 7% refused, 32% were recommended for immediate cystectomy, and 25% did not receive NAC for other reasons. Phase 2 was more stringent, with a multidisciplinary approach. Significant improvement in referral and NAC use was seen. About 78% vs 30% of patients were seen by medical oncology for consideration of NAC before robot-assisted radical cystectomy and 71% vs 36% received NAC compared with phase 1. The NAC utilization rate improved from 10.8% to 55% over 1 year with a diligent multidisciplinary approach. Medical comorbidities were the main reason for patients not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (AC; 30% and 33%). CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary approach and coordination of services can help optimize the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for bladder cancer.
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: Ettore Di Trapani; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Giorgio Gandaglia; Lorenzo Rocchini; Marco Moschini; Daphne Lizee; Arie Carneiro; Arjun Sivaraman; Eric Barret; François Rozet; Marc Galiano; Mostefa Bennamoun; Renzo Colombo; Nazareno Suardi; Alberto Briganti; Francesco Montorsi; Xavier Cathelineau Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-07-22 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jonathan J Duplisea; Ross J Mason; Chad A Reichard; Roger Li; Yu Shen; Stephen A Boorjian; Colin P Dinney Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-07-31 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Tina Hsu; Peter C Black; Kim N Chi; Christina M Canil; Bernhard J Eigl; Girish Kulkarni; Scott North; Lori Wood; Alexandre R Zlotta; Anthea Lau; Tony Panzarella; Srikala S Sridhar Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Christine B Weldon; Sarah M Friedewald; Swati A Kulkarni; Melissa A Simon; Ruth C Carlos; Jonathan B Strauss; Mikele M Bunce; Art Small; Julia R Trosman Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Lauren C Harshman; Abhishek Tripathi; Matthew Kaag; Jason A Efstathiou; Andrea B Apolo; Jean H Hoffman-Censits; Walter M Stadler; Evan Y Yu; Bernard H Bochner; Eila C Skinner; Tracy Downs; Anne E Kiltie; Dean F Bajorin; Khurshid Guru; William U Shipley; Gary D Steinberg; Noah M Hahn; Srikala S Sridhar Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2017-12-06 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Mark A Kashtan; Thejus T Jayakrishnan; Rahul Rajeev; John C Charlson; Fabian Johnston; T Clark Gamblin; Kiran K Turaga Journal: Int J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-12-08 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Elizabeth A Guancial; Breton Roussel; Derek P Bergsma; Kevin C Bylund; Deepak Sahasrabudhe; Edward Messing; Supriya G Mohile; Chunkit Fung Journal: Clin Interv Aging Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 4.458
Authors: Katarzyna Gronostaj; Anna Katarzyna Czech; Jakub Fronczek; Tomasz Wiatr; Mikołaj Przydacz; Przemysław Dudek; Łukasz Curyło; Wojciech Szczeklik; Piotr Chłosta Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2020-02-27