In a Danish study (DaBlaCa-13) reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, Lindgren et al found that short-term intensive chemoresection with mitomycin reduced the need for surgical procedures in patients with recurrent non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
The trial was conducted at two sites in Denmark between January 2018 and August 2021. A total of 119 patients with a history of stage Ta low- or high-grade disease were enrolled upon recurrence.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive either:
The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients undergoing a surgical procedure (TURBT or office biopsy with tumor fulguration) within 2 years from inclusion. Recurrence-free survival at 12 months was compared between groups.
Overall, procedures were performed in 71% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 57%–81%) of patients in the intervention group and in 100% (95% CI = 94%–100%) of patients in the control group (P < .001).
No difference between groups was observed in proportions of patients requiring a procedure due to subsequent recurrence; such procedures were required in 37 patients in the intervention group (64%) vs 35 (57%) in the control group (P = .5). During follow-up, TURBT was performed in 26 patients in the intervention group (45%) vs 21 (34%) in the control group (P = .2).
Twelve-month recurrence-free survival was 36% (95% CI = 24%–50%) in the intervention group vs 43% (95% CI = 30%–56%) in the control group (P = .5).
The investigators concluded, “Short-term intensive chemoresection is an effective treatment strategy for recurrent non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer that leads to a reduced number of required procedures without compromising long-term oncological safety.”
Maria S. Lindgren, MD, of the Department of Urology, Aarhus University Hospital, is the corresponding author for the Journal of Clinical Oncology article.
Disclosure: The study was supported by the Danish Cancer Society, Medac GmbH Germany, and others. For full disclosures of the study authors, visit ascopubs.org.The content in this post has not been reviewed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. (ASCO®) and does not necessarily reflect the ideas and opinions of ASCO®.