Contemporary management of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who fail intravesical BCG therapy

It is advocated that patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) receive an adjuvant course of intravesical Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) as first-line treatment. However, a substantial proportion of patients will ‘fail’ BCG, either early with persistent (refractory) disease o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:World journal of urology 2011-08, Vol.29 (4), p.415-422
Hauptverfasser: Yates, D. R., Rouprêt, M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 422
container_issue 4
container_start_page 415
container_title World journal of urology
container_volume 29
creator Yates, D. R.
Rouprêt, M.
description It is advocated that patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) receive an adjuvant course of intravesical Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) as first-line treatment. However, a substantial proportion of patients will ‘fail’ BCG, either early with persistent (refractory) disease or recur late after a long disease-free interval (relapsing). Guideline recommendation in the ‘refractory’ setting is radical cystectomy, but there are situations when extirpative surgery is not feasible due to competing co-morbidity, a patient’s desire for bladder preservation or reluctance to undergo surgery. In this review, we discuss the contemporary management of NMIBC in patients who have failed prior BCG and are not suitable for radical surgery and highlight the potential options available. These options can be categorised as immunotherapy, chemotherapy, device-assisted therapy and combination therapy. However, the current data are still inadequate to formulate definitive recommendations, and data from ongoing trials and maturing studies will give us an insight into whether there is a realistic efficacious second-line treatment for patients who fail intravesical BCG but are not candidates for definitive surgery.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00345-011-0681-4
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_879483855</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2407827351</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-78d50d53fd40c13c9113656f9c9b6cfc67e7b2cf83cc90806712647dc0a981443</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU1v3CAQhlGVqtl8_IBeKpRLT7SDwYCPzapJK0XqJTkjFuM1qQ0O2LvKvy-rTVMpUk8zEs-8jOZB6COFLxRAfs0AjNcEKCUgFCX8HVpRzhhRshInaAWy4oQ3ip2is5wfAagUUH9ApxWtOReCrtB-HcPsxikmk57xaILZutGFGccOT2b2pc147-ce937bk-TzbxxiIOOS7eCIDzuT_c7hzWDa1iVsTbCl7PuIO-MH7MOczM5lb82Ar9e3eO5dMtPzBXrfmSG7y5d6jh5uvt-vf5C7X7c_19_uiGUSZiJVW0Nbs67lYCmzDaVM1KJrbLMRtrNCOrmpbKeYtQ0oEJJWgsvWgmkU5Zydo8_H3CnFp8XlWY8-WzcMJri4ZK1kwxVTdV3IqzfkY1xSKMsdIGgqWrEC0SNkU8w5uU5PyY_ldJqCPjjRRye6ONEHJ_qwwqeX4GUzuvZ14q-EAlRHIJensHXp38__T_0D66GXiw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>879092123</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Contemporary management of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who fail intravesical BCG therapy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Yates, D. R. ; Rouprêt, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Yates, D. R. ; Rouprêt, M.</creatorcontrib><description>It is advocated that patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) receive an adjuvant course of intravesical Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) as first-line treatment. However, a substantial proportion of patients will ‘fail’ BCG, either early with persistent (refractory) disease or recur late after a long disease-free interval (relapsing). Guideline recommendation in the ‘refractory’ setting is radical cystectomy, but there are situations when extirpative surgery is not feasible due to competing co-morbidity, a patient’s desire for bladder preservation or reluctance to undergo surgery. In this review, we discuss the contemporary management of NMIBC in patients who have failed prior BCG and are not suitable for radical surgery and highlight the potential options available. These options can be categorised as immunotherapy, chemotherapy, device-assisted therapy and combination therapy. However, the current data are still inadequate to formulate definitive recommendations, and data from ongoing trials and maturing studies will give us an insight into whether there is a realistic efficacious second-line treatment for patients who fail intravesical BCG but are not candidates for definitive surgery.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0724-4983</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1433-8726</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00345-011-0681-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21544661</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Administration, Intravesical ; BCG Vaccine - administration &amp; dosage ; BCG Vaccine - therapeutic use ; Bladder cancer ; Disease Management ; Drug Therapy ; Humans ; Immunotherapy ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Nephrology ; Oncology ; Photochemotherapy ; Salvage Therapy - methods ; Topic Paper ; Treatment Failure ; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms - therapy ; Urology</subject><ispartof>World journal of urology, 2011-08, Vol.29 (4), p.415-422</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-78d50d53fd40c13c9113656f9c9b6cfc67e7b2cf83cc90806712647dc0a981443</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-78d50d53fd40c13c9113656f9c9b6cfc67e7b2cf83cc90806712647dc0a981443</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00345-011-0681-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00345-011-0681-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21544661$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yates, D. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rouprêt, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Contemporary management of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who fail intravesical BCG therapy</title><title>World journal of urology</title><addtitle>World J Urol</addtitle><addtitle>World J Urol</addtitle><description>It is advocated that patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) receive an adjuvant course of intravesical Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) as first-line treatment. However, a substantial proportion of patients will ‘fail’ BCG, either early with persistent (refractory) disease or recur late after a long disease-free interval (relapsing). Guideline recommendation in the ‘refractory’ setting is radical cystectomy, but there are situations when extirpative surgery is not feasible due to competing co-morbidity, a patient’s desire for bladder preservation or reluctance to undergo surgery. In this review, we discuss the contemporary management of NMIBC in patients who have failed prior BCG and are not suitable for radical surgery and highlight the potential options available. These options can be categorised as immunotherapy, chemotherapy, device-assisted therapy and combination therapy. However, the current data are still inadequate to formulate definitive recommendations, and data from ongoing trials and maturing studies will give us an insight into whether there is a realistic efficacious second-line treatment for patients who fail intravesical BCG but are not candidates for definitive surgery.</description><subject>Administration, Intravesical</subject><subject>BCG Vaccine - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>BCG Vaccine - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Bladder cancer</subject><subject>Disease Management</subject><subject>Drug Therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunotherapy</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Nephrology</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Photochemotherapy</subject><subject>Salvage Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Topic Paper</subject><subject>Treatment Failure</subject><subject>Urinary Bladder Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Urology</subject><issn>0724-4983</issn><issn>1433-8726</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU1v3CAQhlGVqtl8_IBeKpRLT7SDwYCPzapJK0XqJTkjFuM1qQ0O2LvKvy-rTVMpUk8zEs-8jOZB6COFLxRAfs0AjNcEKCUgFCX8HVpRzhhRshInaAWy4oQ3ip2is5wfAagUUH9ApxWtOReCrtB-HcPsxikmk57xaILZutGFGccOT2b2pc147-ce937bk-TzbxxiIOOS7eCIDzuT_c7hzWDa1iVsTbCl7PuIO-MH7MOczM5lb82Ar9e3eO5dMtPzBXrfmSG7y5d6jh5uvt-vf5C7X7c_19_uiGUSZiJVW0Nbs67lYCmzDaVM1KJrbLMRtrNCOrmpbKeYtQ0oEJJWgsvWgmkU5Zydo8_H3CnFp8XlWY8-WzcMJri4ZK1kwxVTdV3IqzfkY1xSKMsdIGgqWrEC0SNkU8w5uU5PyY_ldJqCPjjRRye6ONEHJ_qwwqeX4GUzuvZ14q-EAlRHIJensHXp38__T_0D66GXiw</recordid><startdate>20110801</startdate><enddate>20110801</enddate><creator>Yates, D. R.</creator><creator>Rouprêt, M.</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110801</creationdate><title>Contemporary management of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who fail intravesical BCG therapy</title><author>Yates, D. R. ; Rouprêt, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-78d50d53fd40c13c9113656f9c9b6cfc67e7b2cf83cc90806712647dc0a981443</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Administration, Intravesical</topic><topic>BCG Vaccine - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>BCG Vaccine - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Bladder cancer</topic><topic>Disease Management</topic><topic>Drug Therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunotherapy</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Nephrology</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Photochemotherapy</topic><topic>Salvage Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Topic Paper</topic><topic>Treatment Failure</topic><topic>Urinary Bladder Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Urology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yates, D. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rouprêt, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>World journal of urology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yates, D. R.</au><au>Rouprêt, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Contemporary management of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who fail intravesical BCG therapy</atitle><jtitle>World journal of urology</jtitle><stitle>World J Urol</stitle><addtitle>World J Urol</addtitle><date>2011-08-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>415</spage><epage>422</epage><pages>415-422</pages><issn>0724-4983</issn><eissn>1433-8726</eissn><abstract>It is advocated that patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) receive an adjuvant course of intravesical Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) as first-line treatment. However, a substantial proportion of patients will ‘fail’ BCG, either early with persistent (refractory) disease or recur late after a long disease-free interval (relapsing). Guideline recommendation in the ‘refractory’ setting is radical cystectomy, but there are situations when extirpative surgery is not feasible due to competing co-morbidity, a patient’s desire for bladder preservation or reluctance to undergo surgery. In this review, we discuss the contemporary management of NMIBC in patients who have failed prior BCG and are not suitable for radical surgery and highlight the potential options available. These options can be categorised as immunotherapy, chemotherapy, device-assisted therapy and combination therapy. However, the current data are still inadequate to formulate definitive recommendations, and data from ongoing trials and maturing studies will give us an insight into whether there is a realistic efficacious second-line treatment for patients who fail intravesical BCG but are not candidates for definitive surgery.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>21544661</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00345-011-0681-4</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0724-4983
ispartof World journal of urology, 2011-08, Vol.29 (4), p.415-422
issn 0724-4983
1433-8726
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_879483855
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals
subjects Administration, Intravesical
BCG Vaccine - administration & dosage
BCG Vaccine - therapeutic use
Bladder cancer
Disease Management
Drug Therapy
Humans
Immunotherapy
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Nephrology
Oncology
Photochemotherapy
Salvage Therapy - methods
Topic Paper
Treatment Failure
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms - therapy
Urology
title Contemporary management of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who fail intravesical BCG therapy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T12%3A18%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Contemporary%20management%20of%20patients%20with%20high-risk%20non-muscle-invasive%20bladder%20cancer%20who%20fail%20intravesical%20BCG%20therapy&rft.jtitle=World%20journal%20of%20urology&rft.au=Yates,%20D.%20R.&rft.date=2011-08-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=415&rft.epage=422&rft.pages=415-422&rft.issn=0724-4983&rft.eissn=1433-8726&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00345-011-0681-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2407827351%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=879092123&rft_id=info:pmid/21544661&rfr_iscdi=true