Pramit Khetrapal

Robotic Assisted Radical Cystectomy with Extracorporeal Urinary Diversion Does Not Show a Benefit over Open Radical Cystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Background The number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) procedures is increasing despite the lack of Level I evidence showing any advantages over open radical cystectomy (ORC). However, several systematic reviews with meta-analyses including non-randomised studies, suggest an overall benefit for RARC compared to ORC. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the perioperative morbidity and efficacy of RARC compared to ORC in patients with bladder cancer. Methods Literature searches of Medline/Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science and clinicaltrials.gov databases up to 10th March 2016 were performed. The inclusion criteria for eligible studies were RCTs which compared perioperative outcomes of ORC and RARC for bladder cancer. Primary objective was perioperative and histopathological outcomes of RARC versus ORC while the secondary objective was quality of life assessment (QoL), oncological outcomes and cost analysis. Results Four RCTs (from 5 articles) met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 239 patients all with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics of RARC and ORC patients were evenly matched. There was no significant difference between groups in perioperative morbidity, length of stay, positive surgical margin, lymph node yield and positive lymph node status. RARC group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (p<0.001) and wound complications (p = 0.03) but required significantly longer operating time (p<0.001). QoL was not measured uniformly across trials and cost analysis was reported in one RCTs. A test for heterogeneity did highlight differences across operating time of trials suggesting that surgeon experience may influence outcomes. Conclusions This study does not provide evidence to support a benefit for RARC compared to ORC. These results may not have inference for RARC with intracorporeal urinary diversion. Well-designed trials with appropriate endpoints conducted by equally experienced ORC and RARC surgeons will be needed to address this.

Who Should Be Investigated for Haematuria? Results of a Contemporary Prospective Observational Study of 3556 Patients

There remains a lack of consensus among guideline relating to which patients require investigation for haematuria. We determined the incidence of urinary tract cancer in a prospective observational study of 3556 patients referred for investigation of haematuria across 40 hospitals between March 2016 and June 2017 (DETECT 1; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02676180) and the appropriateness of age at presentation in cases with visible (VH) and nonvisible (NVH) haematuria. The overall incidence of urinary tract cancer was 10.0% (bladder cancer 8.0%, renal parenchymal cancer 1.0%, upper tract transitional cell carcinoma 0.7%, and prostate cancer 0.3%). Patients with VH were more likely to have a diagnosis of urinary tract cancer compared with NVH patients (13.8% vs 3.1%). Older patients, male gender, and smoking history were independently associated with urinary tract cancer diagnosis. Of bladder cancers diagnosed following NVH, 59.4% were high-risk cancers, with 31.3% being muscle invasive. The incidence of cancer in VH patients <45 yr of age was 3.5% (n=7) and 1.0% (n=4) in NVH patients <60 yr old. Our results suggest that patients with VH should be investigated regardless of age. Although the risk of urinary tract cancer in NVH patients is low, clinically significant cancers are detected below the age threshold for referral for investigation. PATIENT SUMMARY This study highlights the requirement to investigate all patients with visible blood in the urine and an age threshold of ≥60 yr, as recommended in some guidelines, as the investigation of nonvisible blood in the urine will miss a significant number of urinary tract cancers. Patient preference is important, and evidence that patients are willing to submit to investigation should be considered in reaching a consensus recommendation for the investigation of haematuria. International consensus to guide that patients will benefit from investigation should be developed.

Port-Site Metastases After Robotic Radical Cystectomy: A Systematic Review and Management Options

Abstract Background: Port‐site metastases (PSMs) are a rare occurrence after robotic surgery. For robot‐assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), isolated cases have been reported but management has not been previously described. We present a case of PSM that occurred after RARC and report the results of our systematic review of previously reported PSMs and describe the treatment options. Search Criteria and Methods: We describe a case of a PSM in a 55‐year‐old man who had undergone intracorporeal RARC. We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase databases for previously reported PSMs, detailing the stage and grade of the primary tumor, time to presentation of PSM, treatment offered, and outcomes for the identified cases. Results: We identified 4 cases of PSMs after RARC in published studies and also included our case for analysis. All 5 patients had muscle‐invasive bladder cancer at cystectomy (stage ≥ T2) and 3 had local lymph node‐positive disease. Our aggressive treatment of chemotherapy, wide surgical excision of PSM, and radiotherapy provided our patient with a 2‐year disease‐free status. Conclusion: PSMs are a rare event in RARC, with only 4 other cases reported in published studies. The outcomes have not been well reported for these cases. We propose that multimodality treatment consisting of salvage chemotherapy, surgery, and radiotherapy should be considered, although concessions could be needed after consideration of patient factors.

Can Renal and Bladder Ultrasound Replace Computerized Tomography Urogram in Patients Investigated for Microscopic Hematuria

Purpose Computerized tomography urogram is recommended when investigating patients with hematuria. We determined the incidence of urinary tract cancer and compared the diagnostic accuracy of computerized tomography urogram to that of renal and bladder ultrasound for identifying urinary tract cancer. Materials and Methods The DETECT (Detecting Bladder Cancer Using the UroMark Test) I study is a prospective observational study recruiting patients 18 years old or older following presentation with macroscopic or microscopic hematuria at a total of 40 hospitals. All patients underwent cystoscopy and upper tract imaging comprising computerized tomography urogram and/or renal and bladder ultrasound. Results A total of 3,556 patients with a median age of 68 years were recruited in this study, of whom 2,166 underwent renal and bladder ultrasound, and 1,692 underwent computerized tomography urogram in addition to cystoscopy. The incidence of bladder, renal and upper tract urothelial cancer was 11.0%, 1.4% and 0.8%, respectively, in macroscopic hematuria cases. Patients with microscopic hematuria had a 2.7%, 0.4% and 0% incidence of bladder, renal and upper tract urothelial cancer, respectively. The sensitivity and negative predictive value of renal and bladder ultrasound to detect renal cancer were 85.7% and 99.9% but they were 14.3% and 99.7%, respectively, to detect upper tract urothelial cancer. Renal and bladder ultrasound was poor at identifying renal calculi. Renal and bladder ultrasound sensitivity was lower than that of computerized tomography urogram to detect bladder cancer (each less than 85%). Cystoscopy had 98.3% specificity and 83.9% positive predictive value. Conclusions Computerized tomography urogram can be safely replaced by renal and bladder ultrasound in patients who have microscopic hematuria. The incidence of upper tract urothelial cancer is 0.8% in patients with macroscopic hematuria and computerized tomography urogram is recommended. Patients with suspected renal calculi require noncontrast renal tract computerized tomography. Imaging cannot replace cystoscopy to diagnose bladder cancer.

Does urinary cytology have a role in haematuria investigations

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of urinary cytology to diagnose bladder cancer and upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC) as well as the outcome of patients with a positive urine cytology and normal haematuria investigations in patients in a multicentre prospective observational study of patients investigated for haematuria.

The Role of Robotics in the Invasive Management of Bladder Cancer

Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has been adopted widely in many centres, owed largely to the success of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). It aims to replicate the oncological outcomes of open radical cystectomy (ORC), while providing a shorter recovery period. Despite this, previous RCTs have failed to show a benefit for RARC over ORC. These trials have compared extracorporeal RARC (eRARC) with ORC, which requires a further incision to mobilise the bowel for urinary reconstruction with an open technique. For intracorporeal RARC (iRARC), this urinary reconstruction is performed robotically without further incisions. There are theoretical benefits to this approach such as reduced recovery time for the bowel and reduced ileus rates, but no level 1 evidence currently exists to support this. While there has been an improvement in patient outcomes since the adoption of RARC, various other factors, such as enhanced recovery programmes and surgical learning curve, have made it difficult to attribute this solely to the robotic approach as many centres performing ORC have also shown similar improvements. In this review, we will discuss implementation of RARC as well as perioperative measures that have helped improve outcomes, offer a comparison of outcomes between ORC and RARC and highlight upcoming RCTs that may offer new evidence for or against a paradigm shift in the future of bladder cancer surgery.

Urine-derived lymphocytes as a non-invasive measure of the bladder tumor immune microenvironment

Despite the advances in cancer immunotherapy, only a fraction of patients with bladder cancer exhibit responses to checkpoint blockade, highlighting a need to better understand drug resistance and identify rational immunotherapy combinations. However, accessibility to the tumor prior and during therapy is a major limitation in understanding the immune tumor microenvironment (TME). Herein, we identified urine-derived lymphocytes (UDLs) as a readily accessible source of T cells in 32 patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). We observed that effector CD8+ and CD4+ cells and regulatory T cells within the urine accurately map the immune checkpoint landscape and T cell receptor repertoire of the TME. Finally, an increased UDL count, specifically high expression of PD-1 (PD-1hi) on CD8+ at the time of cystectomy, was associated with a shorter recurrence-free survival. UDL analysis represents a dynamic liquid biopsy that is representative of the bladder immune TME that may be used to identify actionable immuno-oncology (IO) targets with potential prognostic value in MIBC.

Multidomain Quantitative Recovery Following Radical Cystectomy for Patients Within the Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy with Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion Versus Open Radical Cystectomy Randomised Controlled Trial: The First 30 Patients

Many patients develop complications after radical cystectomy (RC) [1]. Reductions in morbidity have occurred through centralisation and technical improvements [2], and perhaps through robot-assisted RC (RARC). Whilst RARC is gaining popularity, there are concerns about oncological safety [3] and extracorporeal reconstruction [4], and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) find little difference [5]. We are conducting a prospective RCT comparing open RC and RARC with mandated intracorporeal reconstruction (Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion versus Open Radical Cystectomy [iROC] trial) [6].

The role of circulating tumour cells and nucleic acids in blood for the detection of bladder cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND Blood-based biomarkers are a neglected resource in bladder cancer, where the mainstay of focus has been on urinary biomarkers. However, blood-based biomarkers are gaining popularity in other solid cancers, particularly circulating tumour cells (CTCs) and circulating nucleic acids. In this systematic review, we identify and discuss the diagnostic value of CTC, cell-free DNA and RNA based biomarkers in bladder cancer. METHODS A MEDLINE/Pubmed systematic search was performed using the following keywords: (bladder cancer) AND (blood OR plasma OR serum) AND biomarker AND (DNA OR RNA OR cfDNA OR cell-free DNA OR RNA OR CTC). All studies including blood-based biomarkers based on DNA, RNA and CTCs were reviewed. Of the included studies, studies reporting sensitivity, specificity and/or AUC/ROC values were further described. RESULTS Systematic searched yielded 47 studies that were eligible, of which 21, 19 and 3 studies reported DNA, RNA and CTC biomarkers respectively. 15 of these studies included sensitivity, specificity and/or AUC/ROC values. Biomarkers sensitivity and specificity ranged widely at 2.4-97.6% and 43.3-100% respectively. Median number of patients recruited in the studies was 56 (IQR 41-90). Only 3 studies included an independent validation cohort. The highest sensitivity and specificity pairing achieved in the validation cohort was 80.0% and 89.1% respectively. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of the blood-based CTC and nucleic acid biomarkers that have been investigated. An overlap in interest of targets between studies suggests that these could be promising biomarkers, but few biomarkers achieve high sensitivity and specificity, and fewer still have been validated independently.

Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion versus open radical cystectomy (iROC): protocol for a randomised controlled trial with internal feasibility study

Introduction Bladder cancer (BC) is a common malignancy and one of the most expensive to manage. Radical cystectomy (RC) with pelvic lymphadenectomy is a gold standard treatment for high-risk BC. Reductions in morbidity and mortality from RC may be achieved through robot-assisted RC (RARC). Prospective comparisons between open RC (ORC) and RARC have been limited by sample size, use of extracorporeal reconstruction and use of outcomes important for ORC. Conversely, while RARC is gaining in popularity, there is little evidence to suggest it is superior to ORC. We are undertaking a prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare RARC with intracorporeal reconstruction (iRARC) and ORC using multimodal outcomes to explore qualitative and quantitative recovery after surgery. Methods and analysis iROC is a multicentre prospective RCT in English National Health Service (NHS) cancer centres. We will randomise 320 patients undergoing RC to either iRARC or ORC. Treatment allocation will occur after trial entry and consent. The primary outcome is days alive and out of hospital within the first 90 days from surgery. Secondary outcomes will measure functional recovery (activity trackers, chair-to-stand tests and health related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires), morbidity (complications and readmissions), cost-effectiveness (using EuroQol-5 Domain-5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) and unit costs) and surgeon fatigue. Patients will be analysed according to intention to treat. The primary outcome will be transformed and analysed using regression. All statistical assumptions will be investigated. Secondary outcomes will be analysed using appropriate regression methods. An internal feasibility study of the first 30 patients will evaluate recruitment rates, acceptance of randomised treatment choice, compliance outcome collection and to revise our sample size. Ethics and dissemination The study has ethical approval (REC reference 16/NE/0418). Findings will be made available to patients, clinicians, funders and the NHS through peer-reviewed publications, social media and patient support groups. Trial registration numbers ISRCTN13680280 and NCT03049410.