Transurethral resection of all visible tumors remains the ultimate
method for the diagnosis and initial management of transitional cell carcinoma
of the bladder. In patients with low-grade, low-stage, small-volume disease,
careful surveillance with endoscopy and intermittent resection or fulguration
alone may be sufficient.
In a previous article, we provided a comprehensive review of the
intravesical agents that are useful in the management of superficial
transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Adjuvant intravesical
chemotherapy or immunotherapy is indicated in patients at high risk for tumor
recurrence based on multiple or large tumors at initial resection (tumor
burden), tumor recurrence(s), high-grade tumors, or papillary tumors associated
with carcinoma in situ, as well as carcinoma in situ without papillary
transitional cell carcinoma.
It is widely accepted among urologists worldwide that adjuvant
intravesical chemotherapy and bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) immunotherapy
significantly alter the natural history, as it is currently understood, of
superficial transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Most urologists agree
upon the short-term effectiveness of induction intravesical, adjuvant treatment
with chemotherapy or BCG. However, the long-term efficacy of prolonged
intravesical treatment, otherwise known as maintenance therapy, is a topic of
Previous studies evaluating the prophylactic efficacy of
thiotepa (Thioplex), mitomycin (Mutamycin), doxorubicin, epirubicin (Ellence),
and BCG have established the superiority of BCG and mitomycin. Consequently,
many of the contemporary studies that utilize maintenance schedules focus on the
use of BCG and mitomycin.
The literature is replete with clinical studies both in support
of and opposition to maintenance therapy. Substantial contributions to the
subject of maintenance intravesical therapy have originated from the efforts of
the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG), the Swedish-Norwegian Bladder Cancer Study
Group, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer.[3-10]
Many urologists agree that potential clinical advantages
accompany the use of maintenance strategies. Such regimens are most prudently
applied in patients with carcinoma in situ and high-grade papillary transitional
cell carcinoma. These patients represent the subgroup at higher risk of either
additional recurrence or progression to muscle-invasive disease with traditional
induction therapy alone.
Advantages of BCG Therapy
Studies directly comparing the efficacy of BCG to doxorubicin or
thiotepa demonstrate a clear advantage for BCG. This advantage is not always
so clear, however, when BCG is directly compared to mitomycin, largely due to
differences in study design.
Overall, the results of mitomycin and other adjuvant
intravesical chemotherapy regimens remain inferior to BCG, especially in
patients at high risk of tumor recurrence.[11-14] Various studies have
demonstrated the reduction of tumor recurrence from 65% to 30% with the use of
BCG.[15-17] Additionally, investigators have been able to show an increase in
time to recurrence and time to progression with a consequent reduction in the
number of radical cystectomies, as well as cancer-related mortalities. Data from
long-term follow-up studies by these investigators show statistically
significant reductions in cancer-specific deaths, from 37% in the control group
to 12% in the BCG group (P < .01).
Improved Complete Response Rates: BCG is undeniably the best
currently available intravesical agent for the management of carcinoma in situ.
An analysis by De Jager et al of six phase II clinical trials highlighted a
complete remission in 76% of BCG-treated patients. Moreover, cystectomy rates in
responders were one-fifth that of nonresponders, and time to cystectomy was
better than double in the BCG group.
Studies by Lamm et al,[19,20] Kavoussi et al, Sarosdy and
Lamm, Okamura et al, and SWOG have further advanced the notion that
improved complete response rates can be achieved by additional intravesical
instillations of BCG spread over time and administered at select intervals.
These studies, which compared induction-only therapy to various maintenance
regimens, reported improvements in complete response rates from approximately
55% to 90%.
Most urologists believe in the efficacy of administering a
second 6-week induction course of BCG for recurrence. Yet, outside of study
protocols, the actual definition for recurrence remains murky. This definition
is critical, as small differences in interpretation may be responsible for the
variable results that have beeen noted among investigators in this field.
6 + 3 Protocol: Differences in practice patterns begin to
emerge, however, when urologists are asked to consider additional instillations
of BCG, either in conjunction with transurethral resection for recurrence or,
especially, as maintenance therapy. In 1997, SWOG published data supporting the
practice of maintenance therapy. They proposed that patients be treated with
a 6-week induction course of BCG followed by three weekly instillations at
months 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36the so-called 6 + 3 protocol. This regimen
produced complete response rates of 87% in patients with carcinoma in situ and
83% in patients with rapidly recurring Ta/T1 disease.
In 2000, SWOG published data from longer follow-up periods,
comparing patients receiving maintenance therapy vs control patients. These
results further supported the long-term durability of maintenance (6 + 3) BCG
therapy, demonstrating a significant therapeutic advantage in the maintenance
arm of the study. Median recurrence-free survival was 35.7 months in the
no-maintenance arm and 76.8 months in the maintenance arm (P < .0001).
Estimated median time to progression was 111.5 months in the no-maintenance arm
and could not be estimated in the maintenance arm.
Studies evaluating urinary cytokine levels[5,24] in patients
undergoing initial intravesical BCG therapy have shed light on a possible
mechanism behind the success of the 6 + 3 protocol. De Boer et al reported a
peak in urinary cytokines during week 6 of induction therapy with BCG.
However, immune stimulation was shown to decrease with subsequent instillations,
demonstrating a peak in urinary cytokines during week 3, and a continued decline
in levels during weeks 4, 5, and 6 with continued intravesical BCG instillation.
Investigators have published results demonstrating no clear
clinical advantage with maintenance intravesical doxorubicin or mitomycin
chemotherapy.[6,26] However, several published studies have described a clinical
advantage with short-term maintenance therapy using mitomycin.[7,8] According to
these data, no significant differences were found in time to recurrence,
progression, and cancer survival between the BCG 6-week induction group and the
mitomycin group undergoing a 6-week induction period plus instillations every
month for 5 months.
More recently, however, the Swedish-Norwegian Bladder Cancer
Study Group published their results comparing maintenance mitomycin with
maintenance BCG. Patients were randomized and treated weekly for 6 weeks
every month for year 1, and then every 3 months for year 2. Median follow-up was
5 years (5 to 105 months). They found no difference in progression rates (47 of
250 patients, 19%), with calculated risks of progression of 31% for T1 disease,
23% for carcinoma in situ, 23% for grade 3 disease, and 19% for grade 2 disease.
There was, however, a reduction in tumor recurrence and an improved disease-free
survival (after crossover) in the BCG-treated group.
One study evaluated the efficacy of monthly mitomycin for 12
months following an 8-week induction course. Tumor recurrence rates were 45% at
month 12 and 58% at month 48 in the control group, compared with 29% at month 12
and 44% at month 48 in the maintenance group (Table
We must also take into account those patients who have become
refractory to primary therapy with intravesical BCG. These patients may show a
secondary response to mitomycin therapy.
Transurethral resection remains the foundation of diagnosis and
initial treatment for superficial transitional cell carcinoma. If recurrence
develops or pathologic assessment places the patient at a higher risk for
recurrence and/or progression to muscle-invasive disease, then adjuvant
intravesical maintenance therapy is warranted. The higher the grade, the larger
the tumor volume, and the higher the pathologic stage at initial diagnosis, the
more likely it is that superficial transitional cell carcinoma will recur.
When choosing an agent for intravesical maintenance therapy
after transurethral resection, one must take into consideration the pathologic
assessment of the lesion, the number of lesions, patient comorbidities,
potential toxicities of the therapy, and the patient’s ability to tolerate a
course of maintenance therapy to completion, including sufficient bladder
capacity to maximize retention time of the selected intravesical agent. This
last point cannot be overstated. The authors of the SWOG study reported only a
16% completion rate among the 243 patients in the maintenance arm who had been
scheduled to receive eight maintenance courses during 3 years of treatment.
Currently, evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of BCG as the
agent of choice for maintenance intravesical therapy. Moreover, it appears that
6 + 3 protocol has superior efficacy against recurrence, but more importantly,
against tumor progression.
However, for patients unable to tolerate BCG, as well as for
those who fail initial therapy, it is encouraging to know that mitomycin is a
potentially viable option when given monthly (5 to 48 months) following an
induction course (6 to 8 weeks). Larger randomized studies comparing maintenance
schemes for BCG and mitomycin are necessary to more accurately assess
differences between the two modalities in progression and cancer survival rates.
With the availability of new agents, either alone or in
combination, we may be able to offer our patients the possibility of bladder
salvage therapy with fewer therapy-limiting side effects. Investigators are
continuing to extract potential clinical value from urinary cytokine levels and
genetic molecular marker research. This work may lead to more refined
maintenance therapy schedules.
One day, we may individualize maintenance intravesical therapy
in a supraselective manner by utilizing each patient’s unique
"profile." This profile would consist of data on tumor volume, grade,
stage, ploidy, p53, p21, Ki-67, and Bax genes, urinary cytokines, and
information not yet appreciated. We may achieve improved results with precisely
timed intravesical combination cocktails with any number of different induction
and maintenance therapy schemes. Until such a time, we will continue to
1. Baselli EC, Greenberg RE: Intravesical therapy for
superficial bladder cancer. Oncology 14:719-729, 2000.
2. Lamm DL: Long-term results of intravesical therapy for
superficial bladder cancer. Urol Clin North Am 19:573-580, 1992.
3. Okamura T, Tozawa K, Yamada Y, et al: Clinicopathological
evaluation of repeated courses of intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin
instillation for preventing recurrence of initially resistant superficial
bladder cancer. J Urol 156:967-971, 1996.
4. Lamm DL, Blumenstein BA, Crissman JD, et al: Maintenance
bacillus Calmette-Guérin immunotherapy for recurrent Ta, T1 and carcinoma in
situ transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: A randomized Southwest Oncology
Group Study. J Urol 163:1124-1129, 2000.
5. Reijke TM, De Boer EC, Kurth KH, et al: Urinary interleukin-2
monitoring during prolonged bacillus Calmette-Guérin treatment: Can it predict
the optimal number of instillations? J Urol 161:67-71, 1999.
6. Huland H, Klöppel G, Feddersen I, et al: Comparison of
different schedules of cytostatic intravesical instillations in patients with
superficial bladder carcinoma: Final evaluation of a prospective multicenter
study with 419 patients. J Urol 144(1):68-71; discussion 71-72, 1990.
7. Witjes, JA, Meijden AP, Collette L, et al: Long-term
follow-up of an EORTC randomized prospective trial comparing intravesical
bacille Calmette-Guérin-RIVM and mitomycin-C in superficial bladder cancer.
Urology 52(3):403-410, 1999.
8. Debruyne F, van der Meijden AP, Witjes JA, et al: Bacillus
Calmette-Guérin versus mitomycin-C intravesical therapy in superficial bladder
cancer: Results of a randomized trial after 21 months of follow up. Urology
9. Malstrom PU, Wijkstrom H, Lundholm C, et al: 5-year follow-up
of a randomized prospective study comparing mitomycin-C and bacillus
Calmette-Guérin in patients with superficial bladder carcinoma.
Swedish-Norwegian Bladder Cancer Study Group. J Urol 161:1124-1127, 1999.
10. Minervini R, Felipetto R, Vigano L, et al: Recurrences and
progression of superficial bladder cancer following long-term intravesical
prophylactic therapy with mitomycin C: 48-month follow-up. Urol Int
11. Lundholm C, Norlen BJ, Ekman P, et al: A randomized
prospective study comparing long-term intravesical instillations of mitomycin-C
and bacillus Calmette-Guérin in patients with superficial bladder carcinoma. J
Urol 156:372-376, 1996.
12. Krege S, Giani G, Meyer R, et al: A randomized multicenter
trial of adjuvant therapy in superficial bladder cancer: Transurethral resection
only versus transurethral resection plus mitomycin-C versus transurethral
resection plus bacillus Calmette-Guérin. J Urol 156:962-968, 1996.
13. Vegt PD, Witjes JA, Witjes WP, et al: A randomized study of
intravesical mitomycin-C, bacillus Calmette-Guérin Tice and bacillus
Calmette-Guérin RIVM treatment in pTa-pT1 papillary carcinoma and carcinoma in
situ of the bladder. J Urol 153:929-934, 1995.
14. Melekos MD, Zarakovitis IE, Fokaefs ED, et al: Intravesical
bacillus Calmette-Guérin vs epirubicin in the prophylaxis of recurrent and/or
multiple superficial bladder tumors. Oncology 53:281-286, 1996.
15. Melekos MD, Chionis H, Pantazakos A, et al: Intravesical
bacillus Calmette-Guérin immunoprophylaxis of superficial bladder cancer:
Results of a controlled prospective trial with modified treatment schedule. J
Urol 149:744-748, 1993.
16. Herr HW: Transurethral resection and intravesical therapy of
superficial bladder tumors. Urol Clin North Am 18:525-528, 1991.
17. Pagano F, Bassi P, Milani C, et al: A low dose BCG regimen
in superficial bladder cancer therapy: Is it effective? J Urol 146:32-35, 1991.
18. De Jager R, Guinan P, Lamm D, et al: Long-term complete
remission in bladder carcinoma in situ with intravesical Tice bacillus
Calmette-Guérin-overview analysis of six phase II clinical trials. Urology
19. Lamm DL, Blumenstein B, Crawford ED, et al: A randomized
trial of intravesical doxorubicin and immunotherapy with bacille
Calmette-Guérin for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. N Engl J Med
20. Lamm DL: BCG immunotherapy for transitional-cell carcinoma
in situ of the bladder. Oncology 9:947-952, 1995.
21. Kavoussi LR, Torrence RJ, Gillen DP, et al: Results of 6
weekly intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin instillations on the treatment of
superficial bladder tumors. J Urol 139:935-940, 1988.
22. Sarosdy MF, Lamm DL: Long-term results of intravesical
bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy for superficial bladder cancer. J Urol
23. Lamm DL, Blumenstein B, Sarosdy MF, et al: Significant
long-term patient benefits with BCG maintenance therapy: A Southwest Oncology
Group Study. J Urol 157:213-216, 1997.
24. De Jong WH, DeBoer EC, van der Meijden AP, et al: Presence
of interleukin-2 in urine of superficial bladder cancer patients after
intravesical immunotherapy with bacillus Calmette Guerin. Cancer Immunol
Immunother 31:182-186, 1990.
25. De Boer EC, De Jong WH, Steerenberg PA, et al: Induction of
urinary IL1, IL2, IL6 and tumour necrosis factor during intravesical
immunotherapy with BCG in superficial bladder cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother
26. Flamm J: Long-term versus short-term doxorubicin
hydrochloride instillation after transurethral resection of superficial bladder
cancer. Eur Urol 17(2):119-124, 1990.