Giovanni Motterle1, Jack R Andrews2, Alessandro Morlacco3, R Jeffrey Karnes4. 1. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology-Urology, Padova, Italy. 2. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology-Urology, Padova, Italy. 4. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Electronic address: Karnes.R@mayo.edu.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is recommended prior to radical cystectomy in the setting of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Despite a 5-10% survival benefit, some patients do not respond to NAC. Identification of the nonresponders could avoid side effects and delay in surgery. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to summarize the latest evidence regarding predictors of NAC response. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for published studies including clinical, pathological, molecular, and imaging tests or factors that can be applied before or during NAC to predict its results. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Patient characteristics and imaging techniques seem to have minimal utility to predict NAC response. Only advanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques seem to have a potential role. There is insufficient evidence to suggest a change in NAC paradigm for variant histology, whereas the most promising results come from molecular characterization of tumors. CONCLUSIONS: No validated instrument currently exists to predict NAC response. While awaiting further evidence, no strong recommendation can be made toward a shift in paradigm. PATIENT SUMMARY: The most effective and aggressive treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer is radical cystectomy preceded by effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this paper, we reviewed the current literature and published evidence to identify predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. To date, no instrument exists to predict which patients will respond to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
CONTEXT: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is recommended prior to radical cystectomy in the setting of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Despite a 5-10% survival benefit, some patients do not respond to NAC. Identification of the nonresponders could avoid side effects and delay in surgery. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to summarize the latest evidence regarding predictors of NAC response. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for published studies including clinical, pathological, molecular, and imaging tests or factors that can be applied before or during NAC to predict its results. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Patient characteristics and imaging techniques seem to have minimal utility to predict NAC response. Only advanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques seem to have a potential role. There is insufficient evidence to suggest a change in NAC paradigm for variant histology, whereas the most promising results come from molecular characterization of tumors. CONCLUSIONS: No validated instrument currently exists to predict NAC response. While awaiting further evidence, no strong recommendation can be made toward a shift in paradigm. PATIENT SUMMARY: The most effective and aggressive treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer is radical cystectomy preceded by effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this paper, we reviewed the current literature and published evidence to identify predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. To date, no instrument exists to predict which patients will respond to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Authors: Albert Font; Montserrat Domenech; Oscar Buisan; Hector Lopez; Andrea González; Olatz Etxaniz; Marta Matas; Xavier Elias; Maica Gomez; Mariona Figols; Judith Horneros; Juan Carlos Pardo; Lucia Notario; Vicenç Ruiz de Porras; Ignacio Perez; Joan Areal; Anna Esteve Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-09-15 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Victor M Schuettfort; David D'Andrea; Fahad Quhal; Hadi Mostafaei; Ekaterina Laukhtina; Keiichiro Mori; Frederik König; Michael Rink; Mohammad Abufaraj; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Stefano Luzzago; Morgan Rouprêt; Dmitry Enikeev; Kristin Zimmermann; Marina Deuker; Marco Moschini; Reza Sari Motlagh; Nico C Grossmann; Satoshi Katayama; Benjamin Pradere; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: BJU Int Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 5.969
Authors: Haoyang Mi; Trinity J Bivalacqua; Max Kates; Roland Seiler; Peter C Black; Aleksander S Popel; Alexander S Baras Journal: Cell Rep Med Date: 2021-08-27