TY - JOUR
T1 - EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer—An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort
T2 - Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees
AU - Witjes, J. Alfred
AU - Babjuk, Marek
AU - Bellmunt, Joaquim
AU - Maxim Bruins, H.
AU - De Reijke, Theo M.
AU - De Santis, Maria
AU - Gillessen, Silke
AU - James, Nicholas
AU - Maclennan, Steven
AU - Palou, Juan
AU - Powles, Tom
AU - Ribal, Maria J.
AU - Shariat, Shahrokh F.
AU - Van Der Kwast, Theo
AU - Xylinas, Evanguelos
AU - Agarwal, Neeraj
AU - Arends, Tom
AU - Bamias, Aristotle
AU - Birtle, Alison
AU - Black, Peter C.
AU - Bochner, Bernard H.
AU - Bolla, Michel
AU - Boormans, Joost L.
AU - Bossi, Alberto
AU - Briganti, Alberto
AU - Brummelhuis, Iris
AU - Burger, Max
AU - Castellano, Daniel
AU - Cathomas, Richard
AU - Chiti, Arturo
AU - Choudhury, Ananya
AU - Compérat, Eva
AU - Crabb, Simon
AU - Culine, Stephane
AU - De Bari, Berardino
AU - De Blok, Willem
AU - De Visschere, Pieter J.L.
AU - Decaestecker, Karel
AU - Dimitropoulos, Konstantinos
AU - Dominguez-Escrig, Jose L.
AU - Fanti, Stefano
AU - Fonteyne, Valerie
AU - Frydenberg, Mark
AU - Futterer, Jurgen J.
AU - Gakis, Georgios
AU - Geavlete, Bogdan
AU - Løgager, Vibeke
AU - Müller, Christoph R.
AU - Pappot, Helle
AU - Williams, Andrew
AU - EAU-ESMO
N1 - Corrigendum: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283820301925?via%3Dihub
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Background: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. Objective: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. Design: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference. Setting: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. Participants: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1–3 (disagree), 4–6 (equivocal), and 7–9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). Results and limitations: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. Conclusions: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach. Patient summary: This report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.
AB - Background: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. Objective: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. Design: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference. Setting: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. Participants: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1–3 (disagree), 4–6 (equivocal), and 7–9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). Results and limitations: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. Conclusions: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach. Patient summary: This report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.
KW - Bladder cancer
KW - Consensus
KW - Delphi
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Follow-up
KW - Treatment
U2 - 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.09.035
DO - 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.09.035
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 31753752
AN - SCOPUS:85077452092
SN - 0302-2838
VL - 77
SP - 223
EP - 250
JO - European Urology
JF - European Urology
IS - 2
ER -