6533b7d7fe1ef96bd1267ba2

RESEARCH PRODUCT

The Use of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder: Current Practice Among Clinicians.

Armin PychaMatthias MayChristian G. StiefRoman MayrPhilipp NuhnVladimir NovotnyAxel HaferkampPaul SchramekThomas MartiniEdwin HerrmannJan RoigasChristian BolenzMargit FischChristian GilfrichBoris HadaschikBirgit KlossMarc-oliver GrimmManfred P. WirthMaximilian BurgerFlorian M.e. WagenlehnerFlorian RoghmannStefan MüllerDaniela ColleselliOliver W. HakenbergMichael GierthAtiqullah Aziz

subject

Malemedicine.medical_specialtyUrologymedicine.medical_treatment030232 urology & nephrologyCystectomyCystectomy03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineSex FactorsInternal medicineSurveys and QuestionnairesmedicineHumansIn patientProspective StudiesPractice Patterns Physicians'AgedNeoplasm StagingChemotherapyCarcinoma Transitional Cellbusiness.industryAge FactorsCancerMultimodal therapyGuidelineMiddle Agedmedicine.diseaseSurgeryOncologyUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsCurrent practiceChemotherapy Adjuvant030220 oncology & carcinogenesisCohortFemalebusiness

description

Abstract Introduction Guidelines recommend neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) before radical cystectomy (RC) in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder in clinical stages T2-T4a, cN0M0. We examined the frequency and current practice of NAC and sought to identify predictors for the use of NAC in a prospective contemporary cohort. Materials and Methods We analyzed prospective data from 679 patients in the PROMETRICS (PROspective MulticEnTer RadIcal Cystectomy Series 2011) database. All patients underwent RC in 2011. Uni- and multivariable regression analyses identified predictors of NAC application. Furthermore, a questionnaire was used to evaluate the practice patterns of NAC at the PROMETRICS centers. Results A total of 235 patients (35%) were included in the analysis. Only 15 patients (2.2%) received NAC before RC. Younger age ( P  = .035), lower case volume of the center ( P P  = .038) were identified as predictors for NAC. Of the 200 urologists who replied to the questionnaire, 69% (n = 125) declared tumor stage cT3-4 a/o N1M0 to be the best indication for NAC application, although 45% of the urologists stated that they would not perform NAC despite recommendations. The decision for NAC was made by the individual urologist in 69% of cases, and only 29% reported that all cases were discussed in an interdisciplinary tumor board. Conclusion NAC was rarely applied in the present cohort. We observed a discrepancy between guideline recommendations and practice patterns, despite medical indication and pre-therapeutic interdisciplinary discussion. The potential benefit of NAC within a multimodal approach seems to be neglected by many urologists.

10.1016/j.clgc.2016.09.003https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27765613