U-CHANGE Project: a multidimensional consensus on how clinicians, patients and caregivers may approach together the new urothelial cancer scenario

Introduction Advanced urothelial carcinoma remains aggressive and very hard to cure, while new treatments will pose a challenge for clinicians and healthcare funding policymakers alike. The U-CHANGE Project aimed to redesign the current model of care for advanced urothelial carcinoma patients to identify limitations (“as is” scenario) and recommend future actions (“to be” scenario). Methods Twenty-three subject-matter experts, divided into three groups, analyzed the two scenarios as part of a multidimensional consensus process, developing statements for specific domains of the disease, and a simplified Delphi methodology was used to establish consensus among the experts. Results Recommended actions included increasing awareness of the disease, increased training of healthcare professionals, improvement of screening strategies and care pathways, increased support for patients and caregivers and relevant recommendations from molecular tumor boards when comprehensive genomic profiling has to be provided for appropriate patient selection to ad hoc targeted therapies. Discussion While the innovative new targeted agents have the potential to significantly alter the clinical approach to this highly aggressive disease, the U-CHANGE Project experience shows that the use of these new agents will require a radical shift in the entire model of care, implementing sustainable changes which anticipate the benefits of future treatments, capable of targeting the right patient with the right agent at different stages of the disease.

[1]  Xinyu Zheng,et al.  A multicentre single arm phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant pyrotinib and letrozole plus dalpiciclib for triple-positive breast cancer , 2022, Nature Communications.

[2]  S. Srinivas,et al.  Study EV-103 Cohort H: Antitumor activity of neoadjuvant treatment with enfortumab vedotin monotherapy in patients (pts) with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are cisplatin-ineligible. , 2022, Journal of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  H. Seo,et al.  Fibroblast Growth Factor Inhibitors for Treating Locally Advanced/Metastatic Bladder Urothelial Carcinomas via Dual Targeting of Tumor-Specific Oncogenic Signaling and the Tumor Immune Microenvironment , 2021, International journal of molecular sciences.

[4]  D. West,et al.  28481 Risk for nonmelanoma second primary malignancy in malignant melanoma survivors: A nationwide report from the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program , 2021 .

[5]  T. Powles,et al.  Enfortumab Vedotin in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. Reply. , 2021, New England Journal of Medicine.

[6]  M. Harrison,et al.  Enfortumab vedotin after PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors in cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (EV‑201): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. , 2021, The Lancet. Oncology.

[7]  N. Agarwal,et al.  TROPHY-U-01: A Phase II Open-Label Study of Sacituzumab Govitecan in Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Progressing After Platinum-Based Chemotherapy and Checkpoint Inhibitors , 2021, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  K. Smoyer,et al.  Epidemiology and treatment patterns for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a systematic literature review and gap analysis , 2020, Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy.

[9]  T. Powles,et al.  1O Clinical outcomes in post-operative ctDNA-positive muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (MIUC) patients after atezolizumab adjuvant therapy , 2020 .

[10]  A. Grothey,et al.  Establishment of a Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) and Uptake of Recommendations in a Community Setting , 2020, Journal of personalized medicine.

[11]  N. Vasdev,et al.  Urinary biomarkers in bladder cancer: A review of the current landscape and future directions. , 2020, Urologic oncology.

[12]  M. Milowsky,et al.  Study EV-103: Preliminary durability results of enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. , 2020 .

[13]  P. Giannatempo,et al.  Epidemiology and unmet needs of bladder cancer in Italy: a critical review. , 2020, Minerva urologica e nefrologica = The Italian journal of urology and nephrology.

[14]  M. Babjuk,et al.  EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer-An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort†: Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees. , 2019, European urology.

[15]  E. Philip,et al.  Distress and Quality of Life Among Patients with Advanced Genitourinary Cancers. , 2019, European urology focus.

[16]  R. Huddart,et al.  Erdafitinib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma. , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  Pranav Sharma,et al.  Mental health implications in bladder cancer patients: A review. , 2019, Urologic oncology.

[18]  C. Stief,et al.  Health-related quality of life after radical cystectomy and ileal orthotopic neobladder: effect of detailed continence outcomes , 2019, World Journal of Urology.

[19]  L. Kiemeney,et al.  Epidemiology of Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Contemporary Update of Risk Factors in 2018. , 2018, European urology.

[20]  H. Woodrow,et al.  : A Review of the , 2018 .

[21]  Steven J. M. Jones,et al.  Comprehensive Molecular Characterization of Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer , 2017, Cell.

[22]  F. Montorsi,et al.  Cost of illness of urothelial bladder cancer in Italy , 2017, ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR.

[23]  J. Borrás,et al.  Psychosocial oncology care resources in Europe: a study under the European Partnership for Action Against Cancer (EPAAC) , 2017, Psycho-oncology.

[24]  J. Sfakianos,et al.  Unmet informational and supportive care needs of patients following cystectomy for bladder cancer based on age, sex, and treatment choices. , 2016, Urologic oncology.

[25]  F. Perrone,et al.  Le dolenti note. La tossicità finanziaria del paziente oncologico , 2016 .

[26]  C. la Vecchia,et al.  The Role of Tobacco Smoke in Bladder and Kidney Carcinogenesis: A Comparison of Exposures and Meta-analysis of Incidence and Mortality Risks. , 2016, European urology.

[27]  L. Kiemeney,et al.  Low awareness of risk factors among bladder cancer survivors: New evidence and a literature overview. , 2016, European journal of cancer.

[28]  J. Witjes,et al.  Economic Burden of Bladder Cancer Across the European Union. , 2016, European urology.

[29]  Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.  Screening with urinary dipsticks for reducing morbidity and mortality. , 2015, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[30]  M. Meng,et al.  The natural history of symptoms and distress in patients and families following cystectomy for treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer. , 2014, The Journal of urology.

[31]  J. Borrás,et al.  Policy statement on multidisciplinary cancer care. , 2014, European journal of cancer.

[32]  G. Gethin,et al.  Using an e-Delphi technique in achieving consensus across disciplines for developing best practice in day surgery in Ireland , 2014 .

[33]  Ronald B. Moore,et al.  Using the Delphi technique to improve clinical outcomes through the development of quality indicators in renal cell carcinoma. , 2013, Journal of oncology practice.

[34]  T. Albreht,et al.  Joint Action European Partnership for Action Against Cancer , 2012, Archives of Public Health.

[35]  M. Somerfield,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines: formal systematic review-based consensus methodology. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[36]  E. Wallen,et al.  A multidisciplinary approach to the management of urologic malignancies: does it influence diagnostic and treatment decisions? , 2011, Urologic oncology.

[37]  T. H. van der Kwast,et al.  Select screening in a specific high-risk population of patients suggests a stage migration toward detection of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. , 2011, European urology.

[38]  N. Petrelli,et al.  The organization of multidisciplinary care teams: modeling internal and external influences on cancer care quality. , 2010, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[39]  V. Lokeshwar,et al.  Bladder tumor markers: from hematuria to molecular diagnostics – where do we stand? , 2008, Expert review of anticancer therapy.

[40]  Guy E. Thwaites,et al.  The Diagnosis and Management of Tuberculous Meningitis , 2002, Practical Neurology.

[41]  G. William Walster,et al.  A comparative study of differences in subjective likelihood estimates made by individuals, interacting groups, Delphi groups, and nominal groups☆ , 1973 .

[42]  C. Aring,et al.  A CRITICAL REVIEW , 1939, Journal of neurology and psychiatry.

[43]  Guendalina Graffigna,et al.  ENGAGEMENT: un nuovo modello di partecipazione in sanità , 2018 .

[44]  The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network,et al.  Comprehensive molecular characterization of urothelial bladder carcinoma , 2014, Nature.

[45]  Jacques Ferlay,et al.  GLOBOCAN 2012: Estimated cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2012 , 2013 .

[46]  T. Albreht,et al.  European Partnership for Action Against Cancer - EPAAC , 2011 .

[47]  Serena Borgna,et al.  EUROPEAN PARTNERSHIP , 2006 .

[48]  S. Culine,et al.  Pembrolizumab (pembro) versus investigator’s choice of paclitaxel, docetaxel, or vinflunine in recurrent, advanced urothelial cancer (UC): 5-year follow-up from the phase 3 KEYNOTE-045 trial. , 2022, Journal of Clinical Oncology.

[49]  J. Nicholl,et al.  A systematic review of the evidence , 2022 .