Definition and Diagnosis of Oligometastatic Bladder Cancer: A Delphi Consensus Study Endorsed by the European Association of Urology, European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology, and European Society of Medical Oncology Genitourinary Faculty.

Bladder cancer Multidisciplinary consensus statement Oligometastatic disease

Journal

European urology
ISSN: 1873-7560
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 7512719

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2023
Historique:
received: 01 03 2023
revised: 15 04 2023
accepted: 05 05 2023
medline: 18 9 2023
pubmed: 23 5 2023
entrez: 22 5 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In contrast to other cancers, the concept of oligometastatic disease (OMD) has not been investigated in bladder cancer (BC). To develop an acceptable definition, classification, and staging recommendations for oligometastatic BC (OMBC) spanning the issues of patient selection and the roles of systemic therapy and ablative local therapy. A European consensus group of 29 experts, led by the European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), and including members from all other relevant European societies, was established. A modified Delphi method was used. A systematic review was used to build consensus questions. Consensus statements were extracted from two consecutive surveys. The statements were formulated during two consensus meetings. Agreement levels were measured to determine if consensus was achieved (≥75% agreement). The first survey included 14 questions and the second survey had 12. Owing to a considerable lack of evidence, which was the major limitation, definition was limited in the context of de novo OMBC, which was further classified as synchronous OMD, oligorecurrence, and oligoprogression. A maximum of three metastatic sites, all resectable or amenable to stereotactic therapy, was proposed as the definition of OMBC. Pelvic lymph nodes represented the only "organ" not included in the definition of OMBC. For staging, no consensus on the role of A consensus statement on the definition and staging of OMBC has been formulated. This statement will help to standardise inclusion criteria in future trials, potentiate research on aspects of OMBC for which consensus was not achieved, and hopefully will lead to the development of guidelines on optimal management of OMBC. As an intermediate state between localised cancer and disease with extensive metastasis, oligometastatic bladder cancer (OMBC) might benefit from a combination of systemic treatment and local therapy. We report the first consensus statements on OMBC drawn up by an international expert group. These statements can provide a basis for standardisation of future research, which will lead to high-quality evidence in the field.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
In contrast to other cancers, the concept of oligometastatic disease (OMD) has not been investigated in bladder cancer (BC).
OBJECTIVE
To develop an acceptable definition, classification, and staging recommendations for oligometastatic BC (OMBC) spanning the issues of patient selection and the roles of systemic therapy and ablative local therapy.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
A European consensus group of 29 experts, led by the European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), and including members from all other relevant European societies, was established.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
A modified Delphi method was used. A systematic review was used to build consensus questions. Consensus statements were extracted from two consecutive surveys. The statements were formulated during two consensus meetings. Agreement levels were measured to determine if consensus was achieved (≥75% agreement).
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS
The first survey included 14 questions and the second survey had 12. Owing to a considerable lack of evidence, which was the major limitation, definition was limited in the context of de novo OMBC, which was further classified as synchronous OMD, oligorecurrence, and oligoprogression. A maximum of three metastatic sites, all resectable or amenable to stereotactic therapy, was proposed as the definition of OMBC. Pelvic lymph nodes represented the only "organ" not included in the definition of OMBC. For staging, no consensus on the role of
CONCLUSIONS
A consensus statement on the definition and staging of OMBC has been formulated. This statement will help to standardise inclusion criteria in future trials, potentiate research on aspects of OMBC for which consensus was not achieved, and hopefully will lead to the development of guidelines on optimal management of OMBC.
PATIENT SUMMARY
As an intermediate state between localised cancer and disease with extensive metastasis, oligometastatic bladder cancer (OMBC) might benefit from a combination of systemic treatment and local therapy. We report the first consensus statements on OMBC drawn up by an international expert group. These statements can provide a basis for standardisation of future research, which will lead to high-quality evidence in the field.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37217391
pii: S0302-2838(23)02810-5
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.05.005
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Systematic Review Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

381-389

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Crown Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Aristotelis Bamias (A)

National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, Attikon University Hospital, Chaidari, Greece. Electronic address: abamias@med.uoa.gr.

Arnulf Stenzl (A)

University of Tübingen Medical Center, Tübingen, Germany.

Stephanie L Brown (SL)

Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge, UK.

Laurence Albiges (L)

Goustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France.

Marko Babjuk (M)

2nd Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Praha, Czechia.

Alison Birtle (A)

Rosemere Cancer Centre, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK.

Alberto Briganti (A)

Department of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Maximilian Burger (M)

Department of Urology, Caritas St. Josef Medical Centre, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.

Ananya Choudhury (A)

Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Maurizio Colecchia (M)

Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital and Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Maria De Santis (M)

Department of Urology, Charité University Hospital, Berlin, Germany.

Stefano Fanti (S)

Division of Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Valérie Fonteyne (V)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Michele Gallucci (M)

Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy.

Juan Gómez Rivas (JG)

Department of Urology. Hospital Clinico San Carlos. Madrid, Spain.

Robert Huddart (R)

Royal Marsden Hospital Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Kerstin Junker (K)

Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Abteilung für Klinisch-Experimentelle Forschung, Homburg, Germany.

Stephanie Kroeze (S)

Kantonsspital Aarau AG, Aarau, Switzerland.

Yohann Loriot (Y)

Goustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France.

Axel Merseburger (A)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany.

Rodolfo Montironi (R)

Molecular Medicine and Cell Therapy Foundation, Polytechnic University of the Marche Region, Ancona, Italy.

Andrea Necchi (A)

Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital and Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Christoph Oing (C)

Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Centre for Cancer, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Jan Oldenburg (J)

Akershus University Hospital, Ahus, Denmark.

Piet Ost (P)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Network, Wilrijk, Belgium; Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Michael Pinkawa (M)

Department of Radiation Oncology, MediClin Robert Janker Klinik, Bonn, Germany.

Maria J Ribal (MJ)

Uro-Oncology Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Morgan Rouprêt (M)

Sorbonne University GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, Paris, France.

Harriet Thoeny (H)

Department of Radiology, HFR Fribourg-Hôpital Cantonal, University of Fribourg, Villars-sur-Glâne, Switzerland.

Thomas Zilli (T)

Clinica di Radio-Oncologia, Istituto Oncologico della Svizzera Italiana, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland.

Peter Hoskin (P)

Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH