-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
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
V. Soukup, O. Čapoun, D. Cohen, V. Hernández, M. Burger, E. Compérat, P. Gontero, T. Lam, AH. Mostafid, J. Palou, BWG. van Rhijn, M. Rouprêt, SF. Shariat, R. Sylvester, Y. Yuan, R. Zigeuner, M. Babjuk
Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, přehledy
- MeSH
- hodnocení rizik metody MeSH
- invazivní růst nádoru MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory močového měchýře epidemiologie patologie MeSH
- prognóza MeSH
- směrnice pro lékařskou praxi jako téma MeSH
- společnosti lékařské MeSH
- statistické modely MeSH
- urologie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Evropa MeSH
CONTEXT: This review focuses on the most widely used risk stratification and prediction tools for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical use and relevance of risk stratification and prediction tools to enhance clinical decision making and counselling of patients with NMIBC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The most frequent, currently used risk stratification tools and prognostic models for NMIBC patients were identified by the members of the European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines Panel on NMIBC. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The 2006 European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk tables are the most widely used and validated tools for risk stratification and prognosis prediction in NMIBC patients. The EAU risk categories constitute a simple alternative to the EORTC risk tables and can be used for comparable risk stratification. In the subgroup of NMIBC patients treated with a short maintenance schedule of bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG), the Club Urológico Español de Tratamiento Oncológico (CUETO) scoring model is more accurate than the EORTC risk tables. Both the EORTC risk tables and the CUETO scoring model overestimate the recurrence and progression risks in patients treated according to current guidelines. The new concept of conditional recurrence and progression estimates is very promising during follow-up but should be validated. CONCLUSIONS: Risk stratification and prognostic models enable outcome comparisons and standardisation of treatment and follow-up. At present, none of the available risk stratification and prognostic models reflects current standards of treatment. The EORTC risk tables and CUETO scoring model should be updated with previously unavailable data and recalculated. PATIENT SUMMARY: Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer is a heterogeneous disease. A risk-based therapeutic approach is recommended. We present available risk stratification and prediction tools and the degree of their validation with the aim to increase their use in everyday clinical practice.
Academic Urology Unit University of Aberdeen Scotland UK
Department of Medicine Health Science Centre McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada
Department of Surgical Sciences Urology University of Turin Turin Italy
Department of Urology and Paediatric Urology Julius Maximilians University Würzburg Würzburg Germany
Department of Urology Fundació Puigvert Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Barcelona Spain
Department of Urology Hospital Universitario Fundación de Alcorcón Madrid Spain
Department of Urology Medizinische Universität Graz Graz Austria
Department of Urology Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust London UK
Department of Urology Royal Surrey County Hospital Guildford UK
Department of Urology Vienna General Hospital Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria
EAU Guidelines Office Board European Association of Urology Arnhem The Netherlands
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc21020550
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20210830102211.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 210728s2020 ne f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.euf.2018.11.005 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)30470647
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ne
- 100 1_
- $a Soukup, Viktor $u Department of Urology, General Teaching Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address: viktor.soukup@seznam.cz
- 245 10
- $a 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 / $c V. Soukup, O. Čapoun, D. Cohen, V. Hernández, M. Burger, E. Compérat, P. Gontero, T. Lam, AH. Mostafid, J. Palou, BWG. van Rhijn, M. Rouprêt, SF. Shariat, R. Sylvester, Y. Yuan, R. Zigeuner, M. Babjuk
- 520 9_
- $a CONTEXT: This review focuses on the most widely used risk stratification and prediction tools for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical use and relevance of risk stratification and prediction tools to enhance clinical decision making and counselling of patients with NMIBC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The most frequent, currently used risk stratification tools and prognostic models for NMIBC patients were identified by the members of the European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines Panel on NMIBC. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The 2006 European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk tables are the most widely used and validated tools for risk stratification and prognosis prediction in NMIBC patients. The EAU risk categories constitute a simple alternative to the EORTC risk tables and can be used for comparable risk stratification. In the subgroup of NMIBC patients treated with a short maintenance schedule of bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG), the Club Urológico Español de Tratamiento Oncológico (CUETO) scoring model is more accurate than the EORTC risk tables. Both the EORTC risk tables and the CUETO scoring model overestimate the recurrence and progression risks in patients treated according to current guidelines. The new concept of conditional recurrence and progression estimates is very promising during follow-up but should be validated. CONCLUSIONS: Risk stratification and prognostic models enable outcome comparisons and standardisation of treatment and follow-up. At present, none of the available risk stratification and prognostic models reflects current standards of treatment. The EORTC risk tables and CUETO scoring model should be updated with previously unavailable data and recalculated. PATIENT SUMMARY: Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer is a heterogeneous disease. A risk-based therapeutic approach is recommended. We present available risk stratification and prediction tools and the degree of their validation with the aim to increase their use in everyday clinical practice.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a statistické modely $7 D015233
- 650 _2
- $a invazivní růst nádoru $7 D009361
- 650 _2
- $a směrnice pro lékařskou praxi jako téma $7 D017410
- 650 _2
- $a prognóza $7 D011379
- 650 _2
- $a hodnocení rizik $x metody $7 D018570
- 650 _2
- $a společnosti lékařské $7 D012955
- 650 _2
- $a nádory močového měchýře $x epidemiologie $x patologie $7 D001749
- 650 _2
- $a urologie $7 D014572
- 651 _2
- $a Evropa $7 D005060
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a přehledy $7 D016454
- 700 1_
- $a Čapoun, Otakar $u Department of Urology, General Teaching Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Cohen, Daniel $u Department of Urology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- 700 1_
- $a Hernández, Virginia $u Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Fundación de Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain
- 700 1_
- $a Burger, Maximilian $u Department of Urology and Paediatric Urology, Julius-Maximilians-University Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
- 700 1_
- $a Compérat, Eva $u Department of Pathology, Hôpital Tenon, Assistance Publique Hopitaux de Paris, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie GRC5, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Gontero, Paolo $u Department of Surgical Sciences, Urology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Lam, Thomas $u Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
- 700 1_
- $a Mostafid, A Hugh $u Department of Urology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
- 700 1_
- $a Palou, Joan $u Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- 700 1_
- $a van Rhijn, Bas W G $u Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- 700 1_
- $a Rouprêt, Morgan $u Department of Urology, Hopital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie GRC5, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- 700 1_
- $a Sylvester, Richard $u EAU Guidelines Office Board, European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands
- 700 1_
- $a Yuan, Yuhong $u Department of Medicine, Health Science Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a Zigeuner, Richard $u Department of Urology, Medizinische Universität Graz, Graz, Austria
- 700 1_
- $a Babjuk, Marek $u Department of Urology, Motol University Hospital and Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00193513 $t European urology focus $x 2405-4569 $g Roč. 6, č. 3 (2020), s. 479-489
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30470647 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20210728 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20210830102212 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1691175 $s 1140996
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2020 $b 6 $c 3 $d 479-489 $e 20181122 $i 2405-4569 $m European urology focus $n Eur Urol Focus $x MED00193513
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20210728
