Bladder Cancer Multidisciplinary Clinic (BCMC) Model Influences Disease Assessment and Impacts Treatment Recommendations

The evolving role of multidisciplinary teams in optimizing non-muscle invasive bladder cancer care

INTRODUCTION

Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) represents a significant portion of bladder cancer cases and imposes a substantial economic burden, stemming from both direct treatment costs and long-term surveillance. As the treatment landscape evolves with advances in immunotherapy and targeted therapies, a multidisciplinary approach to management is increasingly crucial for optimizing patient outcomes and resource utilization.

AREAS COVERED

A PubMed search from 2010 to 15 June 2024 was conducted. This review examines the evolving role of multidisciplinary team (MDT) care in NMIBC management. It explores the potential benefits of MDT care, including improved risk stratification and personalized treatment plans, while acknowledging the challenges to implementation and proposing strategies to overcome them.

EXPERT OPINION

With a growing understanding of NMIBC and expanding therapeutic options, MDT care is pivotal in navigating patient care and maximizing outcomes. Strategic planning and collaborative efforts will facilitate the broader adoption of MDT care, enhancing the value of NMIBC treatment. MDT care holds promise for personalized, effective, and cost-efficient care for patients with NMIBC in the future.

Improving the quality of patient care in lung cancer: key factors for successful multidisciplinary team working

International Guidelines as well as Cancer Associations recommend a multidisciplinary approach to lung cancer care. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) can significantly improve treatment decision-making and patient coordination by putting different physicians and other health professionals "in the same room", who collectively decide upon the best possible treatment. However, this is not a panacea for cancer treatment. The impact of multidisciplinary care (MDC) on patient outcomes is not univocal, while the effective functioning of the MDT depends on many factors. This review presents the available MDT literature with an emphasis on the key factors that characterize high-quality patient care in lung cancer. The study was conducted with a bibliographic search using different electronic databases (PubMed Central, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Google) referring to multidisciplinary cancer care settings. Many key elements appear consolidated, while others emerge as prevalent and actual, especially those related to visible barriers which work across geographic, organizational, and disciplinary boundaries. MDTs must be sustained by strategic management, structured within the entity, and cannot be managed as a separate care process. Furthermore, they need to coordinate with other teams (within and outside the organization) and join with the broad range of services delivered by multiple providers at various points of the cancer journey or within the system, with the vision of integrated care.

Urologists, You'll Never Walk Alone! How Novel Immunotherapy and Modern Imaging May Change the Management of Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer

Novel immune checkpoint inhibitors hold promise for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Cooperation between urologists and other multidisciplinary bladder cancer specialists can surmount the challenges involved in using these agents in bladder-sparing approaches. This strategy could deliver a new era of comprehensive evaluation and multimodal treatment for this patient population.

The Growth of Integrated Care Models in Urology

With heightened awareness of health care outcomes and efficiencies and reimbursement-based metrics, it is ever more important that urologists consider the effects of integrated care models on physicians/staff/clinics fulfillment and patient outcomes, and whether and how to optimally implement these models within their unique practice settings. Despite growing evidence that integrating care improves outcomes, uncertainty persists regarding which approach is most efficient and achievable in terms of specialty considerations and financial resources. In this article, we discuss strategies for integrating urologic care and its impact on current and future health care delivery.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Radiation Treatment of Node-Negative Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

PURPOSE

Definitive radiation therapy (RT), with or without concurrent chemotherapy, is an alternative to radical cystectomy for patients with localized, muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are either not surgical candidates or prefer organ preservation. We aim to synthesize an evidence-based guideline regarding the appropriate use of RT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses literature review using the PubMed and Embase databases. Based on the literature review, critical management topics were identified and reformulated into consensus questions. An expert panel was assembled to address key areas of both consensus and controversy using the modified Delphi framework.

RESULTS

A total of 761 articles were screened, of which 61 were published between 1975 and 2019 and included for full review. There were 7 well-designed studies, 20 good quality studies, 28 quality studies with design limitations, and 6 references not suited as primary evidence. Adjuvant radiation therapy after cystectomy was not included owing to lack of high-quality data or clinical use. An expert panel consisting of 14 radiation oncologists, 1 medical oncologist, and 1 urologist was assembled. We identified 4 clinical variants of MIBC: surgically fit patients who wish to pursue organ preservation, patients surgically unfit for cystectomy, patients medically unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and borderline cystectomy candidates based on age with unilateral hydronephrosis and normal renal function. We identified key areas of controversy, including use of definitive radiation therapy for patients with negative prognostic factors, appropriate radiation therapy dose, fractionation, fields and technique when used, and chemotherapy sequencing and choice of agent.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited level-one evidence to guide appropriate treatment of MIBC. Studies vary significantly with regards to patient selection, chemotherapy use, and radiation therapy technique. A consensus guideline on the appropriateness of RT for MIBC may aid practicing oncologists in bridging the gap between data and clinical practice.

Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Survival in Micropapillary Urothelial Carcinoma: Data From a Tertiary Referral Center and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program

BACKGROUND

Micropapillary urothelial carcinoma (MPC) is a rare urothelial carcinoma variant with conflicting data guiding clinical practice. In this study, we explored oncologic outcomes in relation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in a retrospective cohort of patients with MPC, alongside data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with MPC or conventional urothelial carcinoma (CUC) without any variant histology undergoing radical cystectomy (RC) in our institution (2003-2018). SEER-Medicare was also queried to identify patients diagnosed with MPC (2004-2015). Clinicopathologic data and treatment modalities were extracted. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon and chi-square tests were used for comparative analysis and Cox regression for identifying clinical covariates associated with OS.

RESULTS

Our institutional database yielded 46 patients with MPC and 457 with CUC. In SEER-Medicare, 183 patients with MPC were identified, and 63 (34%) underwent RC. In the institutional cohort, patients with MPC had significantly higher incidence of cN+ (17% vs. 8%), pN+ stage (30% vs. 17%), carcinoma-in-situ (43% vs. 25%), and lymphovascular invasion (30% vs. 16%) at RC versus those with CUC (all P < .05). Pathologic complete response (ypT0N0) to NAC was 33% for MPC and 35% for CUC (P = .899). Median OS was lower for institutional MPC versus CUC in univariate analysis (43.6 vs. 105.3 months, P = .006); however, MPC was not independently associated with OS in the multivariate model. Median OS was 25 months in the SEER MPC cohort for patients undergoing RC, while NAC was not associated with improved OS in that group.

CONCLUSION

Pathologic response to NAC was not significantly different between MPC and CUC, while MPC histology was not an independent predictor of OS. Further studies are needed to better understand biological mechanisms behind its aggressive features as well as the role of NAC in this histology variant.

Current Management of Localized Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Consensus Guideline from the Genitourinary Medical Oncologists of Canada

BACKGROUND: Despite recent advances in the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), treatment outcomes remain suboptimal, and variability exists across current practice patterns. OBJECTIVE: To promote standardization of care for MIBC in Canada by developing a consensus guidelines using a multidisciplinary, evidence-based, patient-centered approach who specialize in bladder cancer. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Medline, and Embase was performed; and most recent guidelines from national and international organizations were reviewed. Recommendations were made based on best available evidence, and strength of recommendations were graded based on quality of the evidence. RESULTS: Overall, 17 recommendations were made covering a broad range of topics including pathology review, staging investigations, systemic therapy, local definitive therapy and surveillance. Of these, 10 (59% ) were level 1 or 2, 7 (41% ) were level 3 or 4 recommendations. There were 2 recommendations which did not reach full consensus, and were based on majority opinion. This guideline also provides guidance for the management of cisplatin-ineligible patients, variant histologies, and bladder-sparing trimodality therapy. Potential biomarkers, ongoing clinical trials, and future directions are highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline embodies the collaborative expertise from all disciplines involved, and provides guidance to further optimize and standardize the management of MIBC.