Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The natural history of low-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a collaborative multi-centre study

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

International guidelines vary in terms of their definition and recommendation for management of low-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (LRNMIBC). The ideal management for this large subset of bladder cancer patient remains unclear.

Objective

To evaluate long-term outcomes of patients with LRNMIBC. As a secondary objective, to assess for intergroup heterogeneity in disease-specific outcomes between G1 and G2LG diseases.

Methods

A multi-centre, retrospective study of patients who met the 2015 NICE definition of LRNMIBC. Timeline of diagnosis ranged from 01/01/2012 to 30/06/2016.

Results

A total 390 patients had available follow-up data (G1: 142, G2LG: 249). Over a median follow-up time of 36 months (IQR 25–50), 29.2% of the patients developed a recurrence. G2LG patients were statistically more likely to develop a recurrence (G1: 26.8%, G2LG: 33.7%, p < 0.05). 51.8% of recurrences occurred after 1 year of surveillance. Progression to high-grade disease occurred in 1.8% (n = 7, G1: 3, G2LG: 4) and a further 1.0% (n = 4, G1:3, G2LG: 1) of patients developed muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).

Conclusion

The majority of recurrences occurred after 1 year of surveillance. The risk of disease progression was low; however, this was observed in a cohort of patients with regular cystoscopic follow-up. The risk may be higher if patients were pre-maturely discharged. If a 5-year surveillance programme were to be followed, 96.5% of recurrences would be captured. Lastly, there appears to be intergroup heterogeneity within LRNMIBC with G2LG patients having a statistically higher risk of recurrence compared to G1.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stewart BW, Wild CP (2014) 2014 World Cancer Report. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sievert KD, Amend B, Nagele U et al (2009) Economic aspects of bladder cancer: what are the benefits and costs? World J Urol 27:295

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sangar VK, Ragavan N, Matanhelia SS et al (2005) The economic consequences of prostate and bladder cancer in the UK. BJU Int 95:59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Bladder cancer: diagnosis and management. February 2015 https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng2/evidence. Accessed December 2020

  5. Babjuk M, Böhle A, Burger M et al (2017) EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2016. Eur Urol 71:447–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang SS, Boorjian SA, Chou R et al. Diagnosis and Treatment of Non- Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: AUA/SUO Joint Guideline, 2016. Available at URL: http://www.auanet.org/guidelines/non-muscle-invasive-bladder-cancer. Accessed December 2020

  7. Sylvester RJ, van der Meijden AP, Oosterlinck W et al (2006) Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol 49:466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Almeida GL, Busato WF Jr, Ribas CM et al (2016) External validation of EORTC risk scores to predict recurrence after transurethral resection of brazilian patients with non -muscle invasive bladder cancer stages Ta and T1. Int Braz J Urol 42:932–941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Leo MC, McMullen CK, O’Keeffe-Rosetti M et al (2020) External validation of the EORTC and NCCN bladder cancer recurrence and progression risk calculators in a U.S. community-based health system. Urol Oncol 39:21–39

    Google Scholar 

  10. Soukup V, Čapoun O, Cohen D et al (2020) Risk stratification tools and prognostic models in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a critical assessment from the European association of urology non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer guidelines panel. Eur Urol Focus 15:479–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Millan-Rodriguez F, Chechile-Toniolo G, Salvador-Bayarri J et al (2000) Primary superficial bladder cancer risk groups according to progression, mortality and recurrence. J Urol 164:680–684

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rieken M, Xylinas E, Kluth L et al (2014) Long-term cancer-specific outcomes of TaG1 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 65:201–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Linton KD, Rosario DJ, Thomas F et al (2013) Disease specific mortality in patients with low risk bladder cancer and the impact of cystoscopic surveillance. J Urol 189:828–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Holmang S, Hedelin H, Anderstrom C et al (1999) Recurrence and progression in low grade papillary urothelial tumors. J Urol 162:702–707

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Millán-Rodríguez F, Chéchile-Toniolo G, Salvador-Bayarri J et al (2000) Primary superficial bladder cancer risk groups according to progression, mortality and recurrence. J Urol 164:680–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hurle R, Colombo P, Lazzeri M et al (2018) Pathological outcomes for patients who failed to remain under active surveillance for low-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: update and results from the bladder cancer italian active surveillance project. Eur Urol Oncol 1:437–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Biardeau X, Lam O, Ba V, Campeau L et al (2017) Prospective evaluation of anxiety, pain, and embarrassment associated with cystoscopy and urodynamic testing in clinical practice. Can Urol Assoc J 11:104–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Stav K, Leibovici D, Goren E et al (2004) Adverse effects of cystoscopy and its impact on patients’ quality of life and sexual performance. Isr Med Assoc J 6:474–478

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schroeck FR, Lynch KE, Li Z et al (2019) The impact of frequent cystoscopy on surgical care and cancer outcomes among patients with low-risk, non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Cancer 125:3147–3154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gofrit ON, Pode D, Pizov G et al (2018) ‘Very-low-risk’ bladder tumours—a new entity? BJU Int 121:627–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee A, Lee HJ, Huang HH et al (2019) Low-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: further prognostic stratification into the “very-low-risk” group based on tumor size. Int J Urol 26:481–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Jaffer.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None of the authors have any conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jaffer, A., Lee, M., Khalil, O. et al. The natural history of low-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a collaborative multi-centre study. Int Urol Nephrol 54, 2175–2180 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-022-03264-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-022-03264-8

Keywords

Navigation