Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on survival and recurrence patterns after robot‐assisted radical cystectomy for muscle‐invasive bladder cancer: Results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dharmesh Gopalakrishnan ◽  
Ahmed S Elsayed ◽  
Ahmed A Hussein ◽  
Zhe Jing ◽  
Qiang Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Robotic Cystectomy ◽  
Recurrence Patterns ◽  
Muscle Invasive

scholarly journals Efficient delivery of radical cystectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer

Cancer ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajjai S. Alva ◽  
Christopher T. Tallman ◽  
Chang He ◽  
Maha H. Hussain ◽  
Khaled Hafez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Efficient Delivery ◽  
Muscle Invasive

scholarly journals Meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to radical cystectomy alone in improving overall survival of muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients

BMC Urology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agus Rizal A. H. Hamid ◽  
Fanny Riana Ridwan ◽  
Dyandra Parikesit ◽  
Fina Widia ◽  
Chaidir Arif Mochtar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Forest Plot ◽  
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Muscle Invasive

Abstract Background Most patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) developed metastasis within 2 years, even after radical cystectomy (RC). The recurrence rate of MIBC was more than 50% of the cases. A meta-analysis conducted by Yin et al. showed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) + RC improves overall survival in MIBC compared with RC only. However, a new meta-analysis by Li et al. concluded that NAC + RC was not superior to RC only in improving overall survival. The inconsistencies of these studies required further comprehensive analysis to recommend NAC use in bladder cancer treatment. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to analyze previous studies that compare the efficacy of NAC + RC versus RC only to improve overall survival of MIBC. Methods The articles were searched using Pubmed with keywords “muscle-invasive bladder cancer”, “neoadjuvant chemotherapy”, “cystectomy”, and “overall survival”. The articles that were published until June 2020 were screened. The overall survival outcome was analyzed as hazard ratio (HR) and presented in a forest plot. Result Seventeen studies were included in meta-analysis with a total sample of 13,391 patients, consist of 2890 received NAC followed by RC and 10,418 underwent RC only. Two studies used methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/cisplatin (MVAC), two studies used gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC), one study used Cisplatin-based regimen, one study used MVAC or GC, one study used gemcitabine/carboplatin (GCarbo) or GC or MVAC, one study used Cisplatin/Gemcitabine or MVAC, one study used Cisplatin only, one study used Cisplatin-based (GC, MVAC) or non-Cisplatin-based (combined paclitaxel/gemcitabine/carboplatin), one study used GC, MVAC, Carboplatin, or Gemcitabine/Nedaplatin (GN), and five studies did not mention the regimen The overall survival in the NAC + RC only group was significantly better than the RC only group (HR 0.82 [0.71–0.95], p = 0.009). Conclusion NAC + RC is recommended to improve overall survival in MIBC patients. A further study assessing side effects and quality of life regarding NAC + RC is needed to establish a strong recommendation regarding this therapy.

scholarly journals Fewer tumour draining sentinel nodes in patients with progressing muscle invasive bladder cancer, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical cystectomy

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. 2207-2213
Author(s):  
Julia Alvaeus ◽  
Robert Rosenblatt ◽  
Markus Johansson ◽  
Farhood Alamdari ◽  
Tomasz Jakubczyk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Clinical Staging ◽  
Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Sentinel Nodes ◽  
Muscle Invasive ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Purpose To examine the relationship between the number of tumour draining sentinel nodes (SNs) and pathoanatomical outcomes, in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and radical cystectomy (RC). Materials and Methods In an ongoing prospective multicenter study, we included 230 patients with suspected urothelial MIBC from ten Swedish urological centers. All underwent TURb and clinical staging. From the cohort, 116 patients with urothelial MIBC; cT2-cT4aN0M0, underwent radical cystectomy (RC) and lymphadenectomy with SN-detection (SNd). 83 patients received cisplatin-based NAC and 33 were NAC-naïve. The number and locations of detected SNs and non-SNs were recorded for each patient. The NAC treated patients were categorized by pathoanatomical outcomes post-RC into three groups: complete responders (CR), stable disease (SD) and progressive disease (PD). Selected covariates with possible impact on SN-yield were tested in uni -and multivariate analyses for NAC-treated patients only. Results In NAC treated patients, the mean number of SNs was significantly higher in CR patients (3.3) and SD patients (3.6) compared with PD patients (1.4) (p = 0.034). In a linear multivariate regression model, the number of harvested nodes was the only independent variable that affected the number of SNs (p = 0.0004). Conclusions The number of tumor-draining SNs in NAC-treated patients was significantly lower in patients with progressive disease.

scholarly journals Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy with Intra-corporeal Neo-Bladder

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Víctor Enrique Corona-Montes ◽  
Eduardo Gonzalez-Cuenca ◽  
Laurent López ◽  
Juan Eduardo Sánchez-Núñez ◽  
Richard Gaston
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Oncological Results ◽  
Muscle Invasive ◽  
Continent Urinary Reservoir

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a step-by-step description of the robot-assisted radical cystectomy with an intra-corporeal neo-bladder technique and a recent review of its outcomes. The procedure is also known as anterior pelvic exenteration or cysto-prostatectomy in the case of female or male respectively. Radical cystectomy (RC) is the gold standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, but there are also several surgical indications for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. In the past years, minimally invasive surgery and the da Vinci system technology have played a major role in this procedure, with description of brand-new techniques and specific approaches for the creation of a continent urinary reservoir. The following chapter provides a detailed description of the robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with Y-shaped intra-corporeal bladder as well as a literary review of distinct perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes from the available RARC randomized controlled trials. Despite its high cost and complexity, the intra-corporeal technique has become widely popular around the world and is used more frequently each time. The described data in this chapter, demonstrates that morbidity can be reduced whilst simultaneously offer non-inferior oncological results and less intraoperative blood loss in contrast to the open RC approach.

scholarly journals PD03-11 OUTCOMES OF NON-MUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER AFTER ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL CYSTECTOMY

2020 ◽  
Vol 203 ◽  
pp. e76-e77
Author(s):  
Ahmed Elsayed* ◽  
Zhe Jing ◽  
Jennifer Osei ◽  
Lee Richstone ◽  
Andrew Wagner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Muscle Invasive
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document