NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Structured Abstract
Objectives:
Although the standard treatment for nonmetastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer is cystectomy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy, there is interest in bladder-preserving therapy as an alternative, and there is uncertainty about the need for and optimal extent of lymph node dissection and optimal chemotherapy regimens and timing of administration.
Data sources:
Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, January 1990 to October 2014; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through September 2014; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews through September 2014; Health Technology Assessment through Third Quarter 2014; National Health Sciences Economic Evaluation Database through Third Quarter 2014; and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects through Third Quarter 2014); references lists; and clinical trials registries.
Review methods:
We selected randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled clinical trials, and nonrandomized cohort studies with concurrent comparators that evaluated bladder-preserving therapies against one another or versus radical cystectomy, that evaluated the effectiveness of lymph node dissection or effects of extent of dissection, and that compared neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy versus another chemotherapy regimen or versus no chemotherapy. The quality of included studies was assessed, data were extracted, and results were summarized qualitatively.
Results:
One randomized controlled trial with methodological limitations found no difference between bladder-preserving external beam radiation therapy (60 Gray) versus radical cystectomy plus radiation therapy (40 Gray) in median survival duration, although bladder-preserving treatment was associated with increased risk of local or regional recurrence (35.8% vs. 6.8%) (strength of evidence: insufficient). Cohort studies of bladder-preserving treatments versus radical cystectomy had methodological shortcomings and reported inconsistent results, precluding reliable conclusions (strength of evidence: insufficient).
Cohort studies suggested that lymph node dissection was associated with lower risk of mortality than no lymph node dissection and that more extensive lymph node dissection with cystectomy might be more effective than less extensive lymph node dissection at improving survival, but studies had methodological limitations, there was some inconsistency in results, and there was variability in the lymph node dissection techniques evaluated (strength of evidence: low).
Six randomized controlled trials consistently found neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin-based combination regimens to be associated with decreased risk, or a trend toward decreased risk, of mortality versus no neoadjuvant chemotherapy, including three trials that evaluated current regimens (cisplatin, methotrexate, and vinblastine; methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) (strength of evidence: moderate). Four trials found adjuvant chemotherapy to be associated with decreased risk of mortality versus no adjuvant chemotherapy, but no trial reported a statistically significant effect and there was some inconsistency in findings (strength of evidence: low). One trial and two cohort studies found no clear differences between neoadjuvant and adjuvant use of methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in survival (strength of evidence: low).
Evidence on harms, effectiveness of treatments for muscle-invasive bladder cancer in patient subgroups (including older patients, patients with comorbidities, and patients with renal dysfunction), and comparative effectiveness of different chemotherapy regimens was too limited to reach reliable conclusions.
Conclusions:
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin-based regimens improved survival in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer, and extended lymph node dissection during cystectomy might be more effective than standard lymph node dissection for improving survival. More research is needed to clarify the effectiveness of bladder-preserving therapies versus radical cystectomy and define patient subgroups in which such therapies may be an option.
Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Key Informants
- Technical Expert Panel
- Peer Reviewers
- Executive Summary
- Introduction
- Methods
- Results
- Results of Literature Searches
- Key Question 1 For patients with nonmetastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer, what is the effectiveness of bladder-preserving treatments (chemotherapy, external beam or interstitial radiation therapy, partial cystectomy, and/or maximal transurethral resection of bladder tumor) for decreasing mortality or improving other outcomes (e.g., recurrence, metastasis, quality of life, functional status) compared with cystectomy alone or cystectomy in combination with chemotherapy?
- Key Question 1a Does the comparative effectiveness differ according to tumor characteristics, such as histology, stage, grade, size, or molecular/genetic markers?
- Key Question 1b Does the comparative effectiveness differ according to patient characteristics, such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, performance status, or medical comorbidities such as chronic kidney disease?
- Key Question 1c What is the comparative effectiveness of various combinations of agents and/or radiation therapy used for bladder-preserving chemotherapy?
- Key Question 1d What is the effectiveness of different bladder-preserving treatments (chemotherapy, external beam or interstitial radiation therapy, partial cystectomy, and/or maximal transurethral resection of bladder tumor) compared with one another?
- Key Question 2 For patients with clinically nonmetastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer that is treated with cystectomy, does regional lymph node dissection improve outcomes compared with cystectomy alone?
- Key Question 2a Does the comparative effectiveness differ according to tumor characteristics, such as histology, stage, grade, size, or molecular/genetic markers?
- Key Question 2b Does the comparative effectiveness differ according to the extent of the regional lymph node dissection (e.g., as measured by the number of lymph nodes removed or the anatomic extent of dissection)?
- Key Question 3 For patients with nonmetastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer that is treated with cystectomy, does neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy improve outcomes compared with cystectomy alone?
- Key Question 3a What is the comparative effectiveness of various combinations of agents used for neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy?
- Key Question 3b Does the comparative effectiveness of various combinations of agents used for neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy differ according to tumor characteristics, such as histology, stage, grade, size, or molecular/genetic markers?
- Key Question 3c Does the comparative effectiveness differ according to patient characteristics, such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, performance status, or medical comorbidities such as chronic kidney disease?
- Key Question 3d Does the comparative effectiveness of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy differ according to dosing frequency and/or the timing of its administration relative to radical cystectomy?
- Key Question 4 What are the comparative adverse effects of treatments for nonmetastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer?
- Key Question 4a How do adverse effects of treatment vary by patient characteristics, such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, performance status, or medical comorbidities such as chronic kidney disease?
- Discussion
- References
- Abbreviations
- Appendix A Search Strategies
- Appendix B PICOTS
- Appendix C Included Studies
- Appendix D Excluded Studies
- Appendix E Evidence Tables
- Appendix F Risk of Bias Ratings
- Appendix G Strength of Evidence
Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services1, Contract No. 290-2012-00014-I, Prepared by: Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Suggested citation:
Chou R, Selph S, Buckley D, Gustafson K, Griffin J, Grusing S, Gore J. Treatment of Nonmetastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 152. (Prepared by the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2012-00014-1.) AHRQ Publication No. 15-EHC015-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; June 2015. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm.
This report is based on research conducted by the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2012-00014-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.
AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.
This report may periodically be assessed for the currency of conclusions. If an assessment is done, the resulting surveillance report describing the methodology and findings will be found on the Effective Health Care Program Web site at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov. Search on the title of the report.
None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.
- 1
540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; www
.ahrq.gov
- NLM CatalogRelated NLM Catalog Entries
- Review Treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A systematic review.[Cancer. 2016]Review Treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A systematic review.Chou R, Selph SS, Buckley DI, Gustafson KS, Griffin JC, Grusing SE, Gore JL. Cancer. 2016 Mar 15; 122(6):842-51. Epub 2016 Jan 15.
- Review Emerging Approaches to Diagnosis and Treatment of Non–Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer[ 2015]Review Emerging Approaches to Diagnosis and Treatment of Non–Muscle-Invasive Bladder CancerChou R, Buckley D, Fu R, Gore JL, Gustafson K, Griffin J, Grusing S, Selph S. 2015 Oct
- Review Treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: update of the EAU guidelines.[Eur Urol. 2011]Review Treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: update of the EAU guidelines.Stenzl A, Cowan NC, De Santis M, Kuczyk MA, Merseburger AS, Ribal MJ, Sherif A, Witjes JA, European Association of Urology (EAU). Eur Urol. 2011 Jun; 59(6):1009-18. Epub 2011 Mar 23.
- A randomized trial of radical cystectomy versus radical cystectomy plus cisplatin, vinblastine and methotrexate chemotherapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer.[J Urol. 1996]A randomized trial of radical cystectomy versus radical cystectomy plus cisplatin, vinblastine and methotrexate chemotherapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer.Freiha F, Reese J, Torti FM. J Urol. 1996 Feb; 155(2):495-9; discussion 499-500.
- Adjuvant chemotherapy for deep muscle-invasive transitional cell bladder carcinoma - a practice guideline.[Can J Urol. 2002]Adjuvant chemotherapy for deep muscle-invasive transitional cell bladder carcinoma - a practice guideline.Segal R, Winquist E, Lukka H, Chin JL, Brundage M, Markman BR, Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative Genitourinary Cancer Disease Site Group. Can J Urol. 2002 Oct; 9(5):1625-33.
- Treatment of Nonmetastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder CancerTreatment of Nonmetastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer
- GVI51_E04763 [Nakaseomyces glabratus]GVI51_E04763 [Nakaseomyces glabratus]Gene ID:2887378Gene
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...