Defining and Treating the Spectrum of Intermediate Risk Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Review Article 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Defining and Treating the Spectrum of Intermediate Risk Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Ashish M. Kamat,*,† J. Alfred Witjes,‡ Maurizio Brausi,§ Mark Soloway,jj € hle,** Donald Lamm,§ Raj Persad,§ Roger Buckley,{ Andreas Bo Marc Colombel** and Joan Palou** From the Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (AMK), Department of Urology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands (JAW), Department of Urology, AUSL Modena, Modena, Italy (MB), Department of Urology, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, Florida (MS), Department of Surgery, University of Arizona, and BCG Oncology, Phoenix, Arizona (DL), Department of Urology/Surgery, Bristol Royal Infirmary & Bristol Urological Institute, Bristol, United Kingdom (RP), Department of Urology, North York General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (RB), Department of Urology, HELIOS Agnes Karll Hospital, Bad Schwartau, Germany (AB), Department of Urology, Claude Bernard University, Hoˆpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France (MC), and Department of Urology, Fundacio  noma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (JP) Puigvert, Universitat Auto

Purpose: Low, intermediate and high risk categories have been defined to help guide the treatment of patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (Ta, T1, CIS). However, while low and high risk disease has been well classified, the intermediate risk category has traditionally comprised a heterogeneous group that does not fit into either of these categories. As a result, many urologists remain uncertain about the categorization of patients as intermediate risk as well as the selection of the most appropriate therapeutic option for this patient population. In this study we examine current literature and clinical practice guidelines on intermediate risk nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer and, based on this review, provide urologists with a better understanding of this heterogeneous risk group as well as practical recommendations for the treatment of intermediate risk patients. Materials and Methods: The IBCG analyzed published clinical trials, metaanalyses and current clinical practice guidelines on intermediate risk nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer available as of September 2013. The definitions of intermediate risk, patient outcomes and guideline recommendations were considered, as were the limitations of the available literature and additional parameters that may be useful in guiding treatment decisions in intermediate risk patients. Results: Current definitions and management recommendations for intermediate risk nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer vary. The most simple and practical

Accepted for publication February 17, 2014. * Correspondence: University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Pressler, Unit 1373, Houston, Texas 77030 (telephone: 713-7923250; FAX: 713-794-482; e-mail: [email protected]). † Financial interest and/or other relationship with Photocure, Abbott, Cubist, FKD, Sanofi Pasteur, Endo Pharmaceuticals and Archimedes Inc. ‡ Financial interest and/or other relationship with Telormedix, Sanofi Pasteur, Ipsen, Allergan, Photocure, Astellas, Nucleix Ltd. and Theracoat. § Financial interest and/or other relationship with Sanofi Pasteur. jj Financial interest and/or other relationship with Sanofi Pasteur, GE Medical and Dendreon. { Financial interest and/or other relationship with Sanofi Pasteur, Amgen, Astellas and AbbVie. ** Nothing to disclose.

Abbreviations and Acronyms AUA ¼ American Urological Association BCG ¼ bacillus Calmette-Guerin CIS ¼ carcinoma in situ CUETO ¼ Club Urologico Espanol de Tratamiento Oncologico EAU ¼ European Association of Urology EORTC ¼ European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer IBCG ¼ International Bladder Cancer Group ICUD ¼ International Consultation on Urological Diseases IR ¼ intermediate risk MMC ¼ mitomycin C NBI ¼ narrow band imaging NCCN ¼ National Comprehensive Cancer Network NMIBC ¼ nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer PDD ¼ photodynamic diagnosis SWOG ¼ Southwest Oncology Group TURBT ¼ transurethral resection of bladder tumor

Editor’s Note: This article is the  of 5 published in this issue for which category 1 CME credits can be earned. Instructions for obtaining credits are given with the questions on pages  and . 0022-5347/14/1922-0001/0 THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY® © 2014 by AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, INC.

Dochead: Review Article

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.2573 Vol. 192, 1-11, August 2014 Printed in U.S.A.

www.jurology.com

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

j

1

58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114

2

115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

definition is that proposed by the IBCG and the AUA of multiple and/or recurrent low grade Ta tumors. The IBCG suggests that several factors should be considered in clinical decisions in intermediate risk disease, including number (greater than 1) and size (greater than 3 cm) of tumors, timing (recurrence within 1 year) and frequency (more than 1 per year) of recurrence, and previous treatment. In patients without these risk factors a single, immediate instillation of chemotherapy is advised. In those with 1 to 2 risk factors adjuvant intravesical therapy (intravesical chemotherapy or maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin) is recommended, and previous intravesical therapy should be considered when choosing between these adjuvant therapies. For those patients with 3 to 4 risk factors maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin is recommended. It is also important that all intermediate risk patients are accurately risk stratified at initial diagnosis and during subsequent followup. This requires appropriate transurethral resection of the bladder tumor, vigilance to rule out carcinoma in situ or other potential high risk tumors, and review of histological material directly with the pathologist. Conclusions: Intermediate risk disease is a heterogeneous category, and there is a paucity of independent studies comparing therapies and outcomes in subgroups of intermediate risk patients. The IBCG has proposed a management algorithm that considers tumor characteristics, timing and frequency of recurrence, and previous treatment. Subgroup analyses of intermediate risk subjects in pivotal EORTC trials and meta-analyses will be important to validate the proposed algorithm and support clear evidence-based recommendations for subgroups of intermediate risk patients. Key Words: urinary bladder neoplasms; mycobacterium bovis; administration, intravesical; chemotherapy, adjuvant; risk

NONMUSCLE invasive bladder cancer includes Ta, T1 tumors and CIS and, therefore, by definition, is a heterogeneous disease with varying oncologic outcomes. Recently low, intermediate and high risk categories were defined to help predict prognosis and guide the treatment of patients with NMIBC. While low risk (ie solitary, primary low grade [G1] Ta) and high risk (ie any T1, high grade [G3] or CIS) disease has been well-defined using the TMN staging system as well as the 1973 and 2004 WHO grading classifications, the intermediate risk category has traditionally comprised all patients not included in either of these categories. Thus, IR disease consists of a heterogeneous group of patients ranging from those with a solitary but recurrent low grade Ta tumor, to those with multiple, frequently recurrent, intravesical treatment refractory low grade Ta tumors. Therefore, the IBCG has suggested that the IR category be subdivided into those with low-intermediate risk disease and those with high-intermediate risk disease.1,2 Given the heterogeneity of IR NMIBC, urologists are often uncertain about which patients fall into this risk category as well as the most appropriate intravesical treatment option for these patients (ie BCG or chemotherapy). A recent online chart review involving 102 urologists and 971 patients with NMIBC from Europe and North America demonstrated that the treatment of IR NMIBC (197 defined as multiple or recurrent low grade tumors) varied substantially, with 24% of subjects treated with TURBT alone, 42% with an immediate postoperative chemotherapeutic instillation, 29% with Dochead: Review Article

intravesical chemotherapy, 7% with BCG induction only, 11% with BCG induction plus maintenance and 7% with other therapies (eg surveillance, intravesical electromotive drug administration with MMC, outpatient laser fulguration etc).3 Even current clinical practice guidelines vary with respect to recommended therapeutic options for IR patients, with some advising active surveillance and office fulguration4 and others recommending intravesical chemotherapy or maintenance BCG.5,6 In this review we provide a better understanding of this heterogeneous risk group as well as practical recommendations for the management of IR disease based on the available literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS A comprehensive MEDLINEÒ search was conducted to identify published clinical trials, systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines and meta-analyses that examined IR NMIBC between 1980 and 2013. Keywords included bladder cancer, non-muscle invasive, intermediate-risk, low-grade Ta, G1-2, recurrent tumors, multiple tumors, BCG, intravesical chemotherapy and TURBT. Reference lists of guidelines, meta-analyses and original papers were also reviewed to identify additional applicable literature. The members of the IBCG (the authors) met on 3 occasions throughout 2012 and 2013 to critically review the identified literature and form a consensus on practical recommendations for the management of IR NMIBC. Data were stratified based on the expert opinion of group members and articles were included in the study if they focused primarily on IR disease (ie multiple or recurrent low grade [G1-2] Ta tumors). Articles focusing

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285

specifically on low risk (solitary, primary low grade Ta tumors) or high risk (T1, high grade Ta, CIS) NMIBC were excluded from analysis. The recommendations provided are based on group consensus.

RESULTS

intravesical chemotherapy. The NCCN recommends TURBT plus observation or a single postoperative chemotherapeutic dose, and/or induction intravesical chemotherapy for low grade Ta tumors. For posttreatment recurrence adjuvant intravesical therapy is recommended.10 Major Clinical Trials and Meta-Analyses. Table 1

Current Definitions and Treatment Outcomes/ Recommendations in IR NMIBC Clinical Practice Guidelines. The Appendix presents the current definitions and treatment recommendations for IR NMIBC proposed by the EAU, AUA, ICUD, NCCN and IBCG.4e10 Note that the definitions vary and in some instances are cumbersome for use in routine clinical practice (eg the EAU definition). The simplest and most practical definition is that proposed by the IBCG and AUA, that of multiple or recurrent low grade Ta tumors.7e9 Although most of the guidelines agree that adjuvant therapy with BCG or chemotherapy is indicated in IR disease, the strength of this recommendation varies and whether BCG induction plus maintenance or induction alone should be used is controversial. The EAU recommends 1 immediate instillation of chemotherapy after TURBT, followed by 1 year of full dose BCG treatment or further chemotherapeutic instillations for a maximum of 1 year.5,6 Similar to the EAU guidelines, the IBCG recommends BCG induction plus maintenance or intravesical chemotherapy after complete TURBT. Recent evidence suggests that the effects of a single immediate chemotherapeutic instillation appear to be most pronounced in low risk NMIBC, with no clear advantage in patients with recurrent or multiple tumors,11,12 or in those scheduled to receive further treatment with BCG.13 The AUA recommends an induction course of BCG or MMC for intermediate risk disease. Although maintenance BCG or MMC is considered optional in IR patients, the AUA acknowledges that maintenance is more effective in decreasing recurrence than induction alone.7,8 The ICUD and NCCN do not specifically define an IR category but do provide some guidance on recurrent, low grade tumors (which are considered intermediate risk by the EAU, AUA and IBCG).4,10 Unlike some of the other guideline groups, the ICUD considers observation and/or office fulguration appropriate therapeutic strategies for recurrent low grade Ta tumors. However, they emphasize that these should not replace formal TURBT as primary treatment of initial tumors or for recurrence that is suspected to represent a change in tumor stage or grade.4 The ICUD also states that intravesical BCG could potentially be used in patients with recurrent, low grade Ta disease who have not responded to Dochead: Review Article

3

summarizes the definitions used in some of the more recent clinical trials and meta-analyses examining IR NMIBC as well as outcomes noted in these trials.14e19 Note that the definition of IR disease used in most of these trials is broad, ie any patient without primary, solitary, low grade NMIBC (low risk), or high grade T1 or CIS (high risk) disease. Other published trials have examined IR patients but have failed to provide a definition of what constituted intermediate risk and, therefore, are not included in table 1. For example, Hendricksen et al compared a standard epirubicin treatment schedule (4 weekly and 5 monthly instillations) to this standard schedule plus an early instillation or maintenance instillations in 731 patients with intermediate and high risk NMIBC.20 The investigators failed to provide a specific definition of IR disease, but did note that the majority of patients had multiple (80%), Ta (79%) and G1-2 tumors (89%). At the 5-year followup no significant difference in recurrence was noted between the treatment groups. As previously mentioned, most current clinical practice guidelines agree that adjuvant therapy with BCG or chemotherapy is necessary in IR NMIBC. Data from several recent trials suggest that BCG with maintenance is superior to maintenance chemotherapy in this population (table 1).17e19,21 EORTC trial 30911 compared the long-term efficacy of 6 weekly intravesical instillations of epirubicin, BCG and BCG plus isoniazid followed by 3 weekly maintenance instillations of epirubicin or BCG at months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 after TURBT (SWOG maintenance schedule) in 837 patients with intermediate and high risk NMIBC.18 Approximately 60% of patients included in this trial were classified as IR and those with CIS were excluded from the study. After a median followup of 9.2 years, time to first recurrence, time to distant metastases, and disease specific and overall survival were all significantly prolonged with BCG vs epirubicin (table 1). Further analysis showed that the observed treatment benefits with maintenance BCG were greater in intermediate vs high risk patients (table 2). An individual patient data meta-analysis of 9 trials that included 2,820 patients with NMIBC (74% of whom had IR disease) revealed a 32% reduction in the risk of recurrence with maintenance BCG

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

286 287 288 289 290 291 292 ½T1 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 ½T2 338 339 340 341 342

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

4

343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399

Table 1. Definitions of IR NMIBC and treatment outcomes in major clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses14e19 References B€ohle et al

Ojea et al

14

15

% (No./total No.) IR Pts in Study Cohort

Definition of IR TaT1, G1-2, multifocal, greater than 3 cm diameter (ie all tumors not considered low risk [single TaG1, 3 cm or less diameter] or high risk [T1, G3, multifocal or highly recurrent, CIS]) Stages TaG2 þ T1G1-2 bladder tumors, without CIS

72 (1,984/2,749)

100

(430)

(97/115)

Hinotsu et al16

EORTC recurrence score 1e9 (intermediate risk)

84

Malmstr€om et al17

All tumors not low risk (single, primary, Ta G1 tumors) or high risk (G3 tumors or CIS)

74 (1,983/2,820)

Sylvester et al18

Neither T1 nor G3 tumors

61

(497/837)

Oddens et al19

Multiple pTa, G1-2 tumors

58

(789/1,355)

(schedules ranged from 3 months to 2 years) vs maintenance MMC (maintenance schedules varied from 3 months to 3 years) (p <0.0001, table 1).17 Although no significant differences in progression and death were noted between treatment groups, the low number of these events in this primarily IR cohort precluded such an analysis. A subgroup analysis of the prospective, randomized FinnBladder I study examined the long-term efficacy of maintenance BCG vs maintenance MMC (both regimens involved 5 weekly instillations followed by monthly instillations for 2 years) in patients with frequently recurrent TaT1 tumors

Outcomes Overall BCG was significantly superior to MMC in reducing tumor recurrence (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.38e0.84, p¼0.005). In IR subgroup BCG maintenance was significantly superior to MMC in reducing recurrence (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.27e0.50, p <0.001). Significantly longer disease-free interval for 27 mg BCG vs 30 mg MMC (p¼0.006). No significant differences with 27 vs 13.5 mg BCG, or 13.5 mg BCG vs 30 mg MMC. BCG maintenance significantly prolonged recurrence-free survival vs BCG induction alone or epirubicin. At 2-yr median followup cumulative recurrence-free survival rates in BCG maintenance, BCG nonmaintenance þ epirubicin groups were 84.6%, 65.4% þ 27.7%, respectively. Overall no difference in time to first recurrence between BCG þ MMC (p¼0.09). In trials with BCG maintenance 32% reduction in recurrence risk was noted with BCG vs MMC (p <0.0001). After median followup of 9.2 yrs, time to first recurrence (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45e0.76, p <0.001), distant metastases (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20e0.90, p¼0.03) þ disease specific survival (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14e0.86, p¼0.02) was significantly longer with maintenance BCG vs maintenance epirubicin; no significant difference in progression was noted. For majority of events analyzed treatment comparison HRs were more extreme in intermediate vs high risk group. In IR pts 3 yrs maintenance BCG was more effective than 1 yr in pts receiving 1/3 BCG dose (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03e1.79, p¼0.032) but not in pts receiving full dose BCG (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.64e1.21, p¼0.44), suggesting that 1 yr full dose maintenance BCG may be sufficient for IR disease.

without CIS (67% of patients had Ta tumors and 60% papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential or low grade disease) with a median followup of 19.4 years.21 The recurrence rate was significantly lower in the BCG maintenance group (59%, 26 of 44 subjects) vs the MMC group (80%, 36 of 45 subjects) (p¼0.005). A trend toward fewer cases of progression and cancer specific death was also observed with BCG. Recent evidence from the EORTC 30962 trial provides further guidance on the appropriate BCG maintenance schedule in IR patients.19 In this study 1,355 patients with intermediate and high risk

Table 2. EORTC 30911 results: comparison of epirubicin and BCG in intermediate and high risk groups and the total study population18 Intermediate Risk

Recurrence: Epirubicin BCG Progression or distant metastases: Epirubicin BCG Death from bladder Ca: Epirubicin BCG

High Risk

Overall

No. Events/Pts (%)

HR (95% CI)

p Value

No. Events/Pts (%)

HR (95% CI)

p Value

No. Events/Pts (%)

HR (95% CI)

p Value

100/170 (58.8) 131/327 (40.1)

1 0.59 (0.45e0.76)

e <0.001

46/104 (44.2) 82/219 (37.4)

1 0.69 (0.48e1.05)

e 0.09

147/279 (52.7) 213/558 (38.2)

1 0.62 (0.50e0.76)

e <0.001

23/170 (13.5) 17/327 (5.2)

1 0.39 (0.21e0.73)

e 0.002

16/104 (15.4) 34/219 (15.5)

1 0.80 (0.44e1.45)

e 0.70

39/279 (14.0) 51/558 (9.1)

1 0.63 (0.41e0.95)

e 0.031

12/170 (7.1) 8/327 (2.4)

1 0.35 (0.14e0.86)

e 0.020

7/104 (6.7) 11/219 (5.0)

1 0.60 (0.23e1.56)

e 0.39

19/279 (6.8) 19/558 (3.4)

1 0.47 (0.25e0.89)

e 0.026

Dochead: Review Article

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513

NMIBC were randomly assigned to full dose BCG for 1 year, one-third dose BCG for 1 year, one-third dose BCG for 3 years or full dose BCG for 3 years. Maintenance instillations of BCG were administered as per the SWOG schedule used in EORTC 30911 and the primary end point was the duration of the disease-free interval. Full dose BCG for 1 year was associated with the best outcomes in IR subjects, with no further improvement in outcomes noted when maintenance was continued to 3 years (table 1). Factors to Consider in IR NMIBC To date, to our knowledge there are no independent studies comparing outcomes and treatment options for the heterogeneous spectrum of IR patients. Until such data become available, various factors (as outlined) need to be considered to aid in clinical decisions in IR disease, including whether the patient truly belongs in this risk category, the number and size of tumors, the timing and frequency of recurrence, and previous treatment. Although recent evidence suggests that novel molecular and genetic markers (eg fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 and P53 tumor suppressor gene mutations, Ki-67 protein and CK20 expression, ezrin expression), may help improve the staging, prognosis and selection of therapeutic options for patients with NMIBC,22 none of these markers are ready for integration into routine clinical practice and, therefore, they are not discussed in detail here. While factors such as age, comorbidities, socioeconomic status and gender need to be considered in all patients with NMIBC, these parameters generally do not influence risk classification and, thus, are also not reviewed in this study. Is it Really Low Grade or IR Disease?. Accurate initial

classification of IR disease is essential to ensure optimal patient outcomes. TURBT is the standard for the initial diagnosis and treatment of all risk levels of NMIBC,5,6 and a complete procedure is required to achieve a good prognosis.23e25 It is also imperative that the presence or absence of CIS (a high grade tumor) be properly determined at baseline to accurately risk stratify the case. Overall the frequency of CIS in patients with IR disease is likely low (less than 4%),26 but this may increase with the current use of image enhancement technologies (eg PDD or NBI). A retrospective study of 289 patients with Ta bladder cancer who underwent multiple bladder biopsies found the incidence of CIS to be 6% in TaG1 and 9% in TaG2 tumors with the 1973 WHO grading system. When using the 2004 WHO grading classification the incidence of CIS was approximately 4% in low grade Ta tumors.27 Dochead: Review Article

5

Urinary and bladder wash cytology as well as bladder biopsies can aid in the diagnosis of CIS. Because cytology has a high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of high grade urothelial carcinoma,5 the authors suggest that it be considered in all patients with NMIBC before TURBT (including those with suspected low grade disease) to help rule out high risk disease and guide further testing. If CIS is suspected because of abnormal cytology or previous history, PDD or NBI can aid in the detection of CIS.28e30 Two recent meta-analyses found that PDD using ultraviolet light after intravesical instillation of 5-aminolevulinic acid or hexylaminolevulinate detected significantly more CIS cases and more tumor positive cases than white light cystoscopy alone.28,29 Another meta-analysis of 8 randomized trials showed that NBI provided greater diagnostic precision for the identification of CIS than white light cystoscopy.30 Appropriate risk stratification of IR NMIBC also relies on expert pathological interpretation. Unfortunately the interpretation of histopathological material is inherently subjective (particularly in IR disease), with interobserver variability in staging and grading ranging between 50% and 60%.5 The 2004 WHO grading system, which categorizes tumors as low or high grade, has been shown to reduce interobserver variability in grading interpretation compared to the WHO 1973 G1-G3 classification system.31,32 However, clinical practice guidelines recommend that tumors be graded using the 1973 and 2004 WHO classifications until the 2004 system has been further validated.4e6,9 These guidelines also recommend close cooperation between urologists and pathologists, and suggest that slides be reviewed directly with the pathologist whenever possible. Natural History of IR Disease. The natural history

of IR disease is difficult to predict given the heterogeneity of tumors in this risk category. To our knowledge there are no studies comparing the disease course of patients with single, recurrent low grade Ta tumors to that of patients with multiple, recurrent low grade tumors. Nonetheless, risk tables developed by the EORTC and CUETO can assist urologists in predicting individual risks of tumor recurrence and progression in IR patients,33,34 and may help guide the clinician in deciding when intravesical chemotherapy or BCG may be warranted. According to the EORTC risk calculator the 5-year probabilities of recurrence and progression are 46% and 6%, respectively, for a single, recurrent, low grade Ta tumor, compared to 78% and 17%, respectively, for frequent (more than 1 per year) recurrences of multiple, large, low

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570

6

571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

grade Ta tumors.33 Given the higher risks of recurrence and progression in the latter group, maintenance BCG may be warranted in these patients. One of the major limitations of the EORTC risk tables is that they are based on a patient population treated predominantly with intravesical chemotherapy (rather than BCG). Thus, these tables tend to overestimate the risk of recurrence and progression in patients treated with BCG. Recently CUETO proposed a modified scoring system for patients treated with BCG that significantly decreases the probability of overestimating the recurrence and progression risk in this group of patients.34 Multiplicity and Tumor Size. Patients with multiple

tumors may be at increased risk for poor outcomes because the chances of incomplete resection increase with the number of tumors. Furthermore, multifocality indicates the susceptibility of the entire urothelium to tumor development (ie the field effect).35 Several older studies have demonstrated that tumor multiplicity is a significant predictor of recurrence of low grade Ta tumors.36e38 In a multivariate analysis examining risk factors for recurrence and progression in 1,529 patients with primary NMIBC (31% of this cohort had stage Ta, G1-2 disease), Mill an-Rodrı´guez et al found that rates of recurrence and progression were nearly twice as high when more than 1 tumor was present.38 Although not specific to patients with IR disease, a more recent retrospective analysis of the clinical and pathological data of 112 patients with primary NMIBC treated with TURBT and BCG showed that tumor multiplicity was the only independent predictor of disease recurrence.39 A large tumor size increases the risk of undetected invasion of the lamina propria, especially in cases in which no second resection has been performed.35 Evidence suggests that tumor size is an important predictive factor for recurrence and progression to muscle invasive disease.37,38 In the multivariate analysis by Mill an-Rodrı´guez et al the risk of tumor recurrence and progression was 1.7 times higher for patients with tumors larger than 3 cm in diameter.38 Therefore, multiplicity and tumor size are factors suggestive of higher risk IR NMIBC that may warrant BCG maintenance therapy. It is important to note that the literature showing an association between tumor size and outcomes has focused on tumor diameters greater than 3 cm. However, in actual practice it is uncommon to encounter tumors of this size in IR disease unless the patient has been lost to followup. Thus, some experts have suggested that a tumor Dochead: Review Article

diameter greater than 1 cm should be considered a cutoff (rather than greater than 3 cm). However, this issue remains to be studied prospectively. Timing and Frequency of Recurrence. Recurrence at

3-month cystoscopy has been demonstrated to be strongly correlated with later recurrences in older studies as well as more recent studies.36,40e42 In a study of 414 patients with Ta G1-2 tumors, 80% were recurrence-free during the 5-year followup period if there was no recurrence at the first 3-month followup cystoscopy. However, of the subjects who experienced recurrence at 3 months only 10% were recurrence-free.41 Kurth et al assessed factors affecting recurrence, progression and death from malignant disease in 576 patients with NMIBC from 2 EORTC studies.43 Multivariate analysis showed that the previous recurrence rate in addition to tumor size, tumor grade and positive 3-month cystoscopy were the most powerful predictors of these 3 outcomes. A more recent CUETO analysis of 1,062 patients with NMIBC treated with BCG showed that recurrence at 3month cystoscopy was highly associated with an increased risk of disease progression (HR 4.6).44 Findings from a number of studies suggest that a recurrence rate of more than 1 per year is also strongly associated with future recurrences, particularly in low grade Ta disease.38,40,45,46 The combined analysis of individual patient data from 2,596 patients with NMIBC that was used to develop the EORTC risk tables found the prior recurrence rate to be one of the most important prognostic factors for future recurrence (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.24e1.46, p <0.0001 for 1 recurrence or less per year vs more than 1 recurrence per year).33 Given this evidence, early and frequent recurrences are suggestive of higher risk IR disease that may also warrant more aggressive treatment. Previous Treatment. Another important consider-

ation in IR NMIBC is the patient’s previous treatment regimen. Although most of the evidence regarding outcomes in patients with NMIBC with recurrence after intravesical therapy tends to be focused on high risk disease, some evidence exists to suggest that BCG may be superior to chemotherapy for the management of treatment failures in IR patients as well. In a randomized trial of 261 patients with NMIBC (89 with multiple, recurrent Ta/ T1 G1-2 disease without CIS) Malmstr€om et al found that at 5-year followup crossover treatment was successful in 39% of patients receiving second line BCG compared to 19% receiving second line MMC.47 Another randomized trial comparing intravesical BCG and MMC with planned crossover after failure of initial therapy in patients with low

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741

7

Algorithm for management of IR NMIBC. Recommendations provided have been simplified for ease of use and will need to be customized to each individual patient, taking into account patient diagnosis, histology, age, previous history and overall condition. For example, 75-year-old male with numerous comorbidities who experiences 2 small (less than 1 cm) low grade recurrences more than 1 year after initial therapy may be candidate for office fulguration and observation rather than BCG maintenance or intravesical chemotherapy as suggested in algorithm. Asterisk indicates that score of 0 refers to solitary, recurrent (greater than 1 year) low grade tumor.

grade, recurrent Ta or T1 disease showed that 32% (19 of 39) of subjects in whom MMC failed and received rescue BCG remained disease-free at followup compared to 19% (4 of 21) of those receiving MMC after BCG failure.48 In addition, the individual patient data meta-analysis by Malmstr€ om et al that included a predominantly IR cohort showed that BCG maintenance was not only more effective than MMC in reducing tumor recurrence in chemotherapy naive subjects but also in those previously treated with intravesical chemotherapy (p¼0.03).17 Dochead: Review Article

Thus, the IBCG recommends that for the appropriate management of recurrence or treatment failures in IR disease, the previous treatment received by the patient should be considered (ie intravesical chemotherapy or BCG).9 For IR patients in whom chemotherapy failed the IBCG recommends TURBT plus BCG induction plus maintenance (ideally the SWOG 3-week maintenance protocol), and an alternative intravesical chemotherapy may also be considered. For cases of BCG failure TURBT plus risk stratification is key, continued BCG with maintenance or radical

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798

8

799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 ½F1 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

cystectomy is recommended, and an alternative intravesical therapy (eg chemotherapy such as gemcitabine or combination with interferon)49 or inclusion in a clinical trial may also be considered. Although gemcitabine, thermochemotherapy and combination therapy with interferon have been shown to be effective in these patients, additional studies are needed before these therapies can be routinely recommended for cases of BCG failure.49 Classification of IR Disease and Recommendations for Management Based on the evidence and clinical practice guidelines reviewed, the IBCG has developed an algorithm to assist urologists in better stratifying IR patients into those at higher risk for disease recurrence/progression who may benefit from BCG maintenance therapy vs those at lower risk in whom intravesical chemotherapy may be sufficient (see figure). We would like to emphasize that this algorithm is based on expert opinion. As previously mentioned, there is a paucity of independent clinical trials comparing outcomes and treatment options for the subgroups of IR patients. Subgroup analyses of IR cohorts from key trials and meta-analyses will be needed for validation of the recommendations proposed in this algorithm. The definition of IR used in this algorithm is that originally proposed by the IBCG and AUA of multiple or recurrent low grade Ta tumors.7e9 We believe this to be a simple and practical definition for use in routine clinical practice. The choice of therapy for patients with IR disease should be considered on a case by case basis. To guide treatment decisions the algorithm takes into account the key factors previously discussed including tumor size, tumor multiplicity, timing and frequency of recurrences, and previous treatment. Patients with none of these factors (ie those with a solitary, late [more than 1 year] low grade recurrence) are at low risk for disease recurrence and progression and, therefore, can be treated similarly to low risk patients (ie TURBT plus a single, immediate chemotherapeutic instillation or, in select cases, even office fulguration and observation). For those with 1 to 2 factors intravesical chemotherapy and BCG maintenance (SWOG 3-week protocol, full dose for 1 year) are appropriate options. As discussed, the patient’s previous treatment regimen should be considered to help determine the relative advantages of BCG vs chemotherapy. IR patients with 3 or more factors are at the highest risk for recurrence and progression based on CUETO and EORTC risk tables and, therefore, these subjects would likely benefit most from BCG maintenance therapy.33,34 Some urologists may be reluctant to use BCG, particularly maintenance therapy, in patients with Dochead: Review Article

IR disease due to side effects that have been associated with the use of BCG in the past. However, recent results from EORTC 30962 showed no significant differences in toxicity according to dose or duration of BCG treatment, with 7.6% of patients receiving one-third dose BCG stopping treatment for toxicity vs 8.0% who received full dose BCG, and 7.1% of subjects randomized to 1 year of maintenance stopping BCG due to adverse events vs 8.6% randomized to 3 years of maintenance.50 Therefore, the additional 2 years of maintenance were not associated with an appreciable increase in toxicity. These results are better than those observed in previous BCG trials, and are likely associated with improvements in BCG administration practices and increased knowledge about the prevention and management of BCG associated adverse events. With each tumor recurrence the risk category should be reconsidered. For example, IR patients with recurrence with a high grade or T1 tumor, or CIS, should be reclassified as high risk. In addition, high risk patients who experience a low grade recurrence after treatment are not considered intermediate risk but remain high risk.

CONCLUSIONS While low and high risk NMIBC have been welldefined, the IR group has traditionally comprised all patients excluded from either of these categories. Current definitions of IR NMIBC in the available literature and in clinical practice guidelines vary, as do treatment recommendations for these patients. Similar to the AUA, the IBCG defines IR NMIBC as multiple or recurrent low grade Ta tumors. The group recommends that several factors be considered to aid in clinical decisions in IR disease, including the number (more than 1) and size (greater than 3 cm) of tumors, the timing (recurrence within 1 year) and frequency (more than 1 per year) of recurrences, and previous treatment (intravesical BCG or chemotherapy). Patients with none of these factors can be treated similarly to low risk patients (ie TURBT plus a single, immediate chemotherapeutic instillation or in select cases office fulguration and observation), while those with 3 or more factors should be treated as high risk (ie TURBT plus BCG with maintenance). For those with 1 to 2 factors intravesical chemotherapy and maintenance BCG are appropriate options, and the patient’s previous treatment regimen should be considered to help guide the choice of intravesical therapy. The IBCG further acknowledges that a correct initial diagnosis and accurate risk stratification are essential for guiding management decisions and ensuring an optimal prognosis in IR subjects.

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969

Therefore, complete TURBT is critical, with appropriate vigilance toward ruling out high grade disease (including CIS) with the use of urinary cytology, PDD, NBI or random biopsies as appropriate. Clinicians should also review histological material directly with pathologists whenever possible.

9

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Julie Tasso and Sandra Steele from Complete Medical Communications provided administrative and editorial support, which was made possible through an unrestricted educational grant from Sanofi Pasteur.

APPENDIX

Clinical practice guideline definitions and treatment recommendations for IR NMIBC4e10 Guidelines EAU (2013)

5,6

NCCN (2013)10

Definition of IR

Recommended Treatment Options

All tumors not defined as low risk (primary, solitary, Ta, G1 [low grade], less than 3 cm, no CIS) or high risk (any of the following: T1 tumor, G3 [high grade] tumor, CIS, multiple and recurrent and large [greater than 3 cm] Ta G1-2 tumors [all conditions must be presented in this point]) No specific definition of IR disease provided; however, treatment recommendations for low grade Ta tumors and posttreatment persistent or recurrent disease are provided (see right)

ICUD (2012)4

No specific definition of IR disease provided; however, treatment recommendations for recurrent, low grade tumors are provided (see right)

IBCG (2011)9

Multiple or recurrent low grade tumors

AUA (2007)7,8

Multifocal and/or large volume, histologically confirmed, low grade Ta or recurrent low grade Ta bladder cancer (high risk of recurrence, low risk of progression)

 TURBT plus 1 immediate instillation of chemotherapy followed by either: /1 year of full dose BCG treatment (grade A), or /Further instillation of chemotherapy for a maximum of 1 year (grade A)  TURBT plus /Observation (category 2A), or /Single dose intravesical chemotherapy within 24 hours (category 2A), and/or /Induction intravesical chemotherapy (category 2A)  For posttreatment recurrent or persistent disease: /Adjuvant intravesical therapy based on tumor size, number and grade  Expectant management only in patients with an established history of low grade Ta bladder cancer (level 3, grade B) /Optimal characteristics for observation include low tumor burden, advanced age, or comorbidity (level 4, grade C)  Formal TURBT for patients who have a change in tumor appearance or who develop positive urine cytology (level 4, grade C)  Office fulguration for patients with small Ta low grade tumors /Fulguration can be followed by immediate intravesical chemotherapy (level 3, grade B)  Induction chemotherapy with or without maintenance has unclear but potential benefit after 1 immediate instillation (level 2b, grade B) /Risks of repeated courses of intravesical chemotherapy have to be weighed against the benefits (level 4, grade C)  Intravesical BCG could potentially be used in those who have not responded to intravesical chemotherapy (level 3, grade B)  Complete TURBT followed by either: /BCG induction plus maintenance, or /Intravesical chemotherapy (adjuvant chemotherapy not to exceed 12 months)  TURBT  Intravesical BCG or MMC (recommendation)  Maintenance BCG or MMC (option)

Note: Please refer to respective guidelines for the specific categories of consensus or evidence-based grading systems used by each of the individual guideline panels.

REFERENCES 1. Lamm D, Persad R, Colombel M et al: Maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin: the standard of care for the prophylaxis and management of intermediate- and high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Eur Urol Suppl 2010; 9: 715. 2. Brausi MA: Challenging the EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC): single instillation of chemotherapy after transurethral resection of NMIBC and chemotherapy versus bacillus Calmette-Guerin in treatment of intermediate-risk tumours. Eur Urol Suppl 2010; 9: 406. 3. Witjes JA, Palou J, Soloway M et al: Current clinical practice gaps in the treatment of intermediate- and high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with emphasis on the Dochead: Review Article

use of bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG): results of an international individual patient data survey (IPDS). BJU Int 2013; 112: 742. 4. Konety B, Oosterlinck W, Chang S et al: Lowgrade Ta urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. In: Bladder Cancer, 2nd ed. Edited by M Soloway and S Khoury. Vienna: ICUD-EAU 2012; pp 231e246. 5. Babjuk M, Burger M, Zigeuner R et al: Guidelines on Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (TaT1 and CIS). Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology 2013. Available at www. uroweb.org/gls/pdf/05_TaT1_Bladder_Cancer_ LR.pdf. Accessed July 24, 2013. 6. Babjuk M, Burger M, Zigeuner R et al: EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial

carcinoma of the bladder: update 2013. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 639. 7. Hall MC, Chang SS, Dalbagni G et al: Guideline for the Management of Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer (Stages Ta, T1, and Tis): 2007 Update. Linthicum, Maryland: American Urological Association 2007. Available at www. auanet.org/education/guidelines/bladder-cancer. cfm. Accessed August 28, 2013. 8. Hall MC, Chang SS, Dalbagni G et al: Guidelines for the management of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (stages Ta, T1, and Tis): 2007 update. J Urol 2007; 178: 2314. 9. Brausi M, Witjes JA, Lamm D et al: A review of current guidelines and best practice recommendations for the management of nonmuscle

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026

10

1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

invasive bladder cancer by the International Bladder Cancer Group. J Urol 2011; 186: 2158.

versus full dose and 1 year versus 3 years of maintenance. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 462.

10. National Comprehensive Cancer Network: Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Bladder Cancer. Version 1. Jenkintown, Pennsylvania: National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2014. Available at www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/ pdf/bladder.pdf. Accessed January 22, 2014.

20. Hendricksen K, Witjes WP, Idema JG et al: Comparison of three schedules of intravesical epirubicin in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 984.

11. Gudjonsson S, Adell L, Merdasa F et al: Should all patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer receive early intravesical chemotherapy after transurethral resection? The results of a prospective randomised multicentre study. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 773. 12. Dobruch J and Herr H: Should all patients receive single chemotherapeutic agent instillation after bladder tumour resection? BJU Int 2009; 104: 170. 13. Cai T, Nesi G, Tinacci G et al: Can early single dose instillation of epirubicin improve bacillus Calmette-Guerin efficacy in patients with nonmuscle invasive high risk bladder cancer? Results from a prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled study. J Urol 2008; 180: 110. 14. B€ohle A, Jocham D and Bock PR: Intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guerin versus mitomycin C for superficial bladder cancer: a formal metaanalysis of comparative studies on recurrence and toxicity. J Urol 2003; 169: 90. 15. Ojea A, Nogueira JL, Solsona E et al: A multicentre, randomised prospective trial comparing three intravesical adjuvant therapies for intermediate-risk superficial bladder cancer: lowdose bacillus Calmette-Guerin (27 mg) versus very low-dose bacillus Calmette-Guerin (13.5 mg) versus mitomycin C. Eur Urol 2007; 52: 1398. 16. Hinotsu S, Akaza H, Naito S et al: Maintenance therapy with bacillus Calmette-Guerin Connaught strain clearly prolongs recurrence-free survival following transurethral resection of bladder tumor for non-muscle-invasive cancer. BJU Int 2011; 108: 187. 17. Malmstr€om PU, Sylvester RJ, Crawford DE et al: An individual patient data meta-analysis of the long-term outcome of randomised studies comparing intravesical mitomycin C versus bacillus Calmette-Guerin for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 247. 18. Sylvester RJ, Brausi MA, Kirkels WJ et al: Long-term efficacy results of EORTC GenitoUrinary Group randomized phase 3 study 30911 comparing intravesical instillations of epirubicin, bacillus Calmette-Guerin and bacillus Calmette-Guerin plus isoniazid in patients with intermediate- and high-risk stage Ta T1 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 766. 19. Oddens J, Brausi M, Sylvester R et al: Final results of an EORTC-GU Cancer Group randomized study of maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin in intermediate- and high-risk Ta, T1 papillary carcinoma of the urinary bladder: one-third dose Dochead: Review Article

21. Jӓrvinen R, Kaasinen E, Sankila A et al: Longterm efficacy of maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin versus maintenance mitomycin C instillation therapy in frequently recurrent TaT1 tumours without carcinoma in situ: a subgroup analysis of the prospective, randomised FinnBladder I study with a 20-year follow-up. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 260. 22. Kamat AM, Hegarty PK, Gee JR et al: ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: screening, diagnosis, and molecular markers. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 4. 23. Brausi M, Collette L, Kurth K et al: Variability in the recurrence rate at first follow-up cystoscopy after TUR in stage Ta T1 transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a combined analysis of seven EORTC studies. Eur Urol 2002; 41: 523. 24. Mariappan P, Zachou A, Grigor KM et al: Detrusor muscle in the first, apparently complete transurethral resection of bladder tumour specimen is a surrogate marker of resection quality, predicts risk of early recurrence, and is dependent on operator experience. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 843. 25. Mariappan P, Finney SM, Head E et al: Good quality white-light transurethral resection of bladder tumours (GQ-WLTURBT) with experienced surgeons performing complete resections and obtaining detrusor muscle reduces early recurrence in new non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: validation across time and place and recommendation for benchmarking. BJU Int 2012; 109: 1666. 26. van der Meijden A, Oosterlinck W, Brausi M et al: Significance of bladder biopsies in Ta,T1 bladder tumors: a report from the EORTC GenitoUrinary Tract Cancer Cooperative Group. EORTCGU Group Superficial Bladder Committee. Eur Urol 1999; 35: 267. 27. Sos L, Palou J, Huguet J et al: Comparison of WHO 1973 to WHO 2004 grading system in bladder cancer related to association to CIS, recurrence and progression in Ta tumours. Eur Urol Suppl 2009; 8: 289, abstract 674. 28. Burger M, Grossman HB, Droller M et al: Photodynamic diagnosis of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with hexaminolevulinate cystoscopy: a meta-analysis of detection and recurrence based on raw data. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 846. 29. Kausch I, Sommerauer M, Montorsi F et al: Photodynamic diagnosis in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of prospective studies. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 595.

30. Zheng C, Lv Y, Zhong Q et al: Narrow band imaging diagnosis of bladder cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int 2012; 110: E680. 31. May M, Brookman-Amissah S, Roigas J et al: Prognostic accuracy of individual uropathologists in noninvasive urinary bladder carcinoma: a multicentre study comparing the 1973 and 2004 World Health Organisation classifications. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 850. 32. Burger M, van der Aa MN, van Oers JM et al: Prediction of progression of non muscle-invasive bladder cancer by WHO 1973 and 2004 grading and by FGFR3 mutation status: a prospective study. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 835. 33. Sylvester RJ, van der Meijden AP, Oosterlinck W et al: Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 466. 34. Fernandez-Gomez J, Madero R, Solsona E et al: The EORTC tables overestimate the risk of recurrence and progression in patients with nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with bacillus Calmette-Guerin: external validation of the EORTC risk tables. Eur Urol 2011; 60: 423. 35. Thalmann GN, Birkh€auser F and Roth B: Management of pT1G3 bladder cancer. Eur Urol Suppl 2011; 10: e1. 36. Parmar MK, Freedman LS, Hargreave TB et al: Prognostic factors for recurrence and followup policies in the treatment of superficial bladder cancer: report from the British Medical Research Council Subgroup on Superficial Bladder Cancer (Urological Cancer Working Party). J Urol 1989; 142: 284. 37. Heney NM, Ahmed S, Flanagan MJ et al: Superficial bladder cancer: progression and recurrence. J Urol 1983; 130: 1083. 38. Millan-Rodrıguez F, Chechile-Toniolo G, SalvadorBayarri et al: Multivariate analysis of the prognostic factors of primary superficial bladder cancer. J Urol 2000; 163: 73. 39. Ajili F, Manai M, Darouiche A et al: Tumor multiplicity is an independent prognostic factor of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with Bacillus Calmette-Guerin immunotherapy. Ultrastruct Pathol 2012; 36: 320. 40. Larsson P, Wijkstr€om H, Thorstenson A et al: A population-based study of 538 patients with newly detected urinary bladder neoplasms followed during 5 years. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2003; 37: 195. 41. Fitzpatrick JM, West AB, Butler MR et al: Superficial bladder tumors (stage pTa, grades 1 and 2): the importance of recurrence pattern following initial resection. J Urol 1986; 135: 920. 42. Ali-El-Dein B, Sarhan O, Hinev A et al: Superficial bladder tumours: analysis of prognostic factors

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140

INTERMEDIATE RISK NONMUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER DEFINITION AND TREATMENT

1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202

and construction of a predictive index. BJU Int 2003; 92: 393. 43. Kurth KH, Denis L, Bouffioux C et al: Factors affecting recurrence and progression in superficial bladder tumours. Eur J Cancer 1995; 31A: 1840. 44. Fernandez-Gomez J, Solsona E, Unda M et al: Prognostic factors in patients with non-muscleinvasive bladder cancer treated with bacillus Calmette-Guerin: multivariate analysis of data from four randomized CUETO trials. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 992. 45. Oosterlinck W, Solsona E, Akaza H et al: Lowgrade Ta (noninvasive) urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Urology 2005; 66: 75.

Dochead: Review Article

46. Millan-Rodrıguez F, Chechile-Toniolo G, SalvadorBayarri J et al: Primary superficial bladder cancer risk groups according to progression, mortality and recurrence. J Urol 2000; 164: 680. 47. Malmstr€om PU, Wijkstr€om H, Lundholm C et al: 5-year followup of a randomized prospective study comparing mitomycin C and bacillus CalmetteGuerin in patients with superficial bladder carcinoma. Swedish-Norwegian Bladder Cancer Study Group. J Urol 1999; 161: 1124. 48. Mangiarotti B, Trinchieri A, Del Nero A, Montanari E: A randomized prospective study of intravesical prophylaxis in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer at intermediate risk of recurrence: mitomycin chemotherapy vs BCG

11

immunotherapy. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2008; 80: 167. 49. Burger M, Oosterlinck W, Konety B et al: ICUDEAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 36. 50. Brausi M, Oddens J, Sylvester R et al: Side effects of bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) in the treatment of intermediate- and high-risk Ta, T1 papillary carcinoma of the bladder: results of the EORTC Genito-Urinary Cancers Group randomised phase 3 study comparing one-third dose with full dose and 1 year with 3 years of maintenance BCG. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 69.

REV 5.2.0 DTD
JURO11354_proof
12 May 2014
8:01 pm
EO: JU-13-2405

1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264