Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0122 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/49572 |
Resumo: | Objectives: To evaluate the clinical practice of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) treatment in Brazil in relation to international guidelines: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU), European Association of Urology (EAU) and American Urological Association (AUA). Materials and Methods: Cross-sectional study using questionnaires about urological practice on treatment of NMIBC during the 32nd Brazilian Congress of Urology. A total of 650 question forms were answered. Results: There were 73% of complete answers (total of 476 question forms). In total, 246 urologists (51.68%) lived in the southeast region and 310 (65.13%) treat 1 to 3 cases of NMIBC per month. Low risk cancer: Only 35 urologists (7.5%) apply the single intravesical dose of immediate chemotherapy with Mitomicin C recommended by the above guidelines. Adjuvant therapy with BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR is used by 167 participants (35.1%) and 271 urologists (56.9%) use only TUR. High risk tumors: 397 urologists (83.4%) use adjuvant therapy, 375 (78.8%) use BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR, of which 306 (64.3%) referred the use for at least one year. Intravesical chemotherapy with Mitomicin C (a controversial recommendation) was used by 22 urologists (4.6%). BCG dose raised a lot of discrepancies. Induction doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 105 (22%), 193 (40.4%) and 54 (11.3%) respectively. Maintenance doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 190 (48.7%), 144 (37.0%) and 32 (8.2%) urologists, respectively. Schemes of administration were also varied and the one cited by SWOG protocol was the most used: 142 (29.8%). Conclusion: SBU, EAU and AUA guidelines are partially respected by Brazilian urologists, particularly in low risk tumors. In high risk tumors, concordance rates are comparable to international data. Further studies are necessary to fully understand the reasons of such disagreement. |
id |
UFSP_a6ac32dd8d1ad8e99a6ad76c8e4a8358 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/49572 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository_id_str |
3465 |
spelling |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer?Urinary Bladder NeoplasmsBcg VaccinePractice Guidelines As TopicBacillus-Calmette-GuerinTransitional-Cell CarcinomaIntravesical TherapyBcg ImmunotherapyEau GuidelinesMitomycin-CStage-TaRiskRecurrenceMetaanalysisObjectives: To evaluate the clinical practice of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) treatment in Brazil in relation to international guidelines: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU), European Association of Urology (EAU) and American Urological Association (AUA). Materials and Methods: Cross-sectional study using questionnaires about urological practice on treatment of NMIBC during the 32nd Brazilian Congress of Urology. A total of 650 question forms were answered. Results: There were 73% of complete answers (total of 476 question forms). In total, 246 urologists (51.68%) lived in the southeast region and 310 (65.13%) treat 1 to 3 cases of NMIBC per month. Low risk cancer: Only 35 urologists (7.5%) apply the single intravesical dose of immediate chemotherapy with Mitomicin C recommended by the above guidelines. Adjuvant therapy with BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR is used by 167 participants (35.1%) and 271 urologists (56.9%) use only TUR. High risk tumors: 397 urologists (83.4%) use adjuvant therapy, 375 (78.8%) use BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR, of which 306 (64.3%) referred the use for at least one year. Intravesical chemotherapy with Mitomicin C (a controversial recommendation) was used by 22 urologists (4.6%). BCG dose raised a lot of discrepancies. Induction doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 105 (22%), 193 (40.4%) and 54 (11.3%) respectively. Maintenance doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 190 (48.7%), 144 (37.0%) and 32 (8.2%) urologists, respectively. Schemes of administration were also varied and the one cited by SWOG protocol was the most used: 142 (29.8%). Conclusion: SBU, EAU and AUA guidelines are partially respected by Brazilian urologists, particularly in low risk tumors. In high risk tumors, concordance rates are comparable to international data. Further studies are necessary to fully understand the reasons of such disagreement.Divisão de Urologia Oncológica, Faculdade de Medicina, Centro de Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUC-Campinas), Campinas, São Paulo, BrazilDisciplina de Urologia, Departamento de Cirurgia da Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Universidade Estadual de Campinas, (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, BrazilDisciplina de Urologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM, Unifesp), São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilDisciplina de Urologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM, Unifesp), São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of ScienceBrazilian soc urol2019-01-21T10:30:05Z2019-01-21T10:30:05Z2016info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion22-28http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0122International Braz J Urol. Rio de janeiro, v. 42, n. 1, p. 22-28, 2016.10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0122S1677-55382016000100022.pdf1677-5538S1677-55382016000100022http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/49572WOS:000372333400006engInternational Braz J Urolinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessReis, Leonardo OliveiraMoro, Juliano CesarBastos Ribeiro, Luis FernandoIamashita Voris, Brunno RaphaelSadi, Marcos Vinicius [UNIFESP]reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2021-09-29T15:59:33Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/49572Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652021-09-29T15:59:33Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? |
title |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? |
spellingShingle |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? Reis, Leonardo Oliveira Urinary Bladder Neoplasms Bcg Vaccine Practice Guidelines As TopicBacillus-Calmette-Guerin Transitional-Cell Carcinoma Intravesical Therapy Bcg Immunotherapy Eau Guidelines Mitomycin-C Stage-Ta Risk Recurrence Metaanalysis |
title_short |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? |
title_full |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? |
title_fullStr |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? |
title_sort |
Are we following the guidelines on non-muscle invasive bladder cancer? |
author |
Reis, Leonardo Oliveira |
author_facet |
Reis, Leonardo Oliveira Moro, Juliano Cesar Bastos Ribeiro, Luis Fernando Iamashita Voris, Brunno Raphael Sadi, Marcos Vinicius [UNIFESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Moro, Juliano Cesar Bastos Ribeiro, Luis Fernando Iamashita Voris, Brunno Raphael Sadi, Marcos Vinicius [UNIFESP] |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Reis, Leonardo Oliveira Moro, Juliano Cesar Bastos Ribeiro, Luis Fernando Iamashita Voris, Brunno Raphael Sadi, Marcos Vinicius [UNIFESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms Bcg Vaccine Practice Guidelines As TopicBacillus-Calmette-Guerin Transitional-Cell Carcinoma Intravesical Therapy Bcg Immunotherapy Eau Guidelines Mitomycin-C Stage-Ta Risk Recurrence Metaanalysis |
topic |
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms Bcg Vaccine Practice Guidelines As TopicBacillus-Calmette-Guerin Transitional-Cell Carcinoma Intravesical Therapy Bcg Immunotherapy Eau Guidelines Mitomycin-C Stage-Ta Risk Recurrence Metaanalysis |
description |
Objectives: To evaluate the clinical practice of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) treatment in Brazil in relation to international guidelines: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU), European Association of Urology (EAU) and American Urological Association (AUA). Materials and Methods: Cross-sectional study using questionnaires about urological practice on treatment of NMIBC during the 32nd Brazilian Congress of Urology. A total of 650 question forms were answered. Results: There were 73% of complete answers (total of 476 question forms). In total, 246 urologists (51.68%) lived in the southeast region and 310 (65.13%) treat 1 to 3 cases of NMIBC per month. Low risk cancer: Only 35 urologists (7.5%) apply the single intravesical dose of immediate chemotherapy with Mitomicin C recommended by the above guidelines. Adjuvant therapy with BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR is used by 167 participants (35.1%) and 271 urologists (56.9%) use only TUR. High risk tumors: 397 urologists (83.4%) use adjuvant therapy, 375 (78.8%) use BCG 2 to 4 weeks after TUR, of which 306 (64.3%) referred the use for at least one year. Intravesical chemotherapy with Mitomicin C (a controversial recommendation) was used by 22 urologists (4.6%). BCG dose raised a lot of discrepancies. Induction doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 105 (22%), 193 (40.4%) and 54 (11.3%) respectively. Maintenance doses of 40, 80 and 120mg were referred by 190 (48.7%), 144 (37.0%) and 32 (8.2%) urologists, respectively. Schemes of administration were also varied and the one cited by SWOG protocol was the most used: 142 (29.8%). Conclusion: SBU, EAU and AUA guidelines are partially respected by Brazilian urologists, particularly in low risk tumors. In high risk tumors, concordance rates are comparable to international data. Further studies are necessary to fully understand the reasons of such disagreement. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016 2019-01-21T10:30:05Z 2019-01-21T10:30:05Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0122 International Braz J Urol. Rio de janeiro, v. 42, n. 1, p. 22-28, 2016. 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0122 S1677-55382016000100022.pdf 1677-5538 S1677-55382016000100022 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/49572 WOS:000372333400006 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0122 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/49572 |
identifier_str_mv |
International Braz J Urol. Rio de janeiro, v. 42, n. 1, p. 22-28, 2016. 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0122 S1677-55382016000100022.pdf 1677-5538 S1677-55382016000100022 WOS:000372333400006 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
International Braz J Urol |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
22-28 |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian soc urol |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian soc urol |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) instacron:UNIFESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
instacron_str |
UNIFESP |
institution |
UNIFESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br |
_version_ |
1841453649459412992 |