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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | World journal of urology 2011-08, Vol.29 (4), p.415-422 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
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 & 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</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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & 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 |