Universität zu Köln

Dogan, Serkan, Hennig, Martin, Frank, Tanja, Struck, Julian P., Cebulla, Angelika, Salem, Johannes, Borgmann, Hendrik ORCID: 0000-0002-3955-564X, Klatte, Tobias, Merseburger, Axel S., Kramer, Mario and Hofbauer, Sebastian L. (2018). Acceptance of Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer in Germany: A Survey of Current Practice. Urol.Int., 101 (1). S. 25 - 31. BASEL: KARGER. ISSN 1423-0399

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Background: Guidelines support the use of neoadjuvant (NAC) and adjuvant (AC) chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. However, data from North America reported the underutilization of NAC in favor of AC despite the lower level of scientific evidence supporting AC. We aimed to assess current practice patterns of NAC and AC in Germany. Methods: A 15-question online survey was developed and sent via email newsletters to members of the German Association of Urology and of the German Society of Residents in Urology in October 2016 to analyze current practice patterns. Results: The survey yielded 141 individual responses from 61 different German urology departments. Eighty-nine (69.0%) and 119 (93.0%) participants were stated to regularly use NAC and AC respectively. The number of participants who were stated to use NAC and AC regularly was not associated with the type of institution (academic vs. nonacademic), number of hospital beds, and number of cystectomies performed annually. Gemcitabine/cisplatin combination chemotherapy was named as the primarily used NAC regimen by 80 (95%) respondents. The median number of administered cycles was 3 for NAC and 4 for AC. In the case of cisplatin ineligibility, combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine/carboplatin was the most common regimen. Respondents stated that chemotherapy was generally administered by urologists (81% for NAC and 85% for AC). Conclusions: Our survey of current practice shows a high acceptance rate of NAC in Germany, which was independent of the type of institution. Although the scientific level of evidence for AC is lower, it still seems to be more widely accepted than NAC. NAC and AC were generally administered by urologists. (C) 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel

Item Type:	Journal Article
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID ORCID Put Code Dogan, Serkan UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Hennig, Martin UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Frank, Tanja UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Struck, Julian P. UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Cebulla, Angelika UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Salem, Johannes UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Borgmann, Hendrik UNSPECIFIED orcid.org/0000-0002-3955-564X UNSPECIFIED Klatte, Tobias UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Merseburger, Axel S. UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Kramer, Mario UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Hofbauer, Sebastian L. UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED
URN:	urn:nbn:de:hbz:38-202332
DOI:	10.1159/000487405
Journal or Publication Title:	Urol.Int.
Volume:	101
Number:	1
Page Range:	S. 25 - 31
Date:	2018
Publisher:	KARGER
Place of Publication:	BASEL
ISSN:	1423-0399
Language:	English
Faculty:	Unspecified
Divisions:	Unspecified
Subjects:	no entry
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Keywords Language RADICAL CYSTECTOMY; UROTHELIAL CARCINOMA; PERIOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY; CISPLATIN; GEMCITABINE; TRENDS; STAGE Multiple languages Urology & Nephrology Multiple languages
Refereed:	Yes
URI:	http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/id/eprint/20233