Historically, bladder-sparing options were primarily for patients unfit for radical cystectomy. Now, with advances in surgical techniques and perioperative care, fewer patients are deemed truly ineligible for surgery. This shift means new bladder-sparing strategies are being developed for a much broader patient population.

Related Insights

The consensus for "event-free survival" (EFS) in bladder-sparing trials is now highly inclusive, counting even high-grade superficial (non-muscle invasive) relapses as events. This is a deliberately conservative choice to maximize patient safety and preempt the risk of these relapses leading to metastasis.

For bladder cancer patients with micrometastatic disease, the standard cystectomy requires a significant delay for the operation and recovery. This window may allow unseen metastases to progress, suggesting that upfront, effective systemic therapy is more critical for survival than immediate major surgery.

During the consensus meeting, patient advocates successfully argued for a highly robust definition of "event-free survival." The final definition counts not just cancer recurrence, but also the need for any additional standard-of-care treatment—including intravesical therapy—as an "event," reflecting the patient's perspective on what constitutes a successful outcome.

Despite strong data favoring pre-surgical systemic therapy, a surgeon argues that many patients will continue to undergo surgery first. This is due to real-world factors like surgeons being the point of diagnosis, urgent symptoms requiring rapid intervention, and patient preferences to have the tumor removed immediately.

In muscle-invasive bladder cancer, cisplatin ineligibility is frequently due to renal insufficiency caused by large, aggressive tumors obstructing the ureter. This redefines this patient group as having more advanced local disease, rather than simply being unfit for chemotherapy, explaining their poor outcomes with surgery alone.

With highly effective neoadjuvant therapies now available, the surgeon's role in muscle-invasive bladder cancer is evolving. They are moving from being the primary decider and treater to being a key manager of a 'perioperative bundle,' where their first goal is often to get patients to medical oncology for systemic treatment.

Expert consensus shows a major paradigm shift: perioperative systemic therapy (like EV-Pembro, scoring 2.9) is the undisputed standard for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Approaches starting with cystectomy alone now score below 1.8, formally branding them as inferior options.

The success of new treatments like immunotherapy and ADCs leads to more patients achieving a deep response. This high efficacy makes patients question the necessity of a radical cystectomy, a life-altering surgery, creating an urgent need for data-driven, bladder-sparing protocols.

With pathologic complete response rates approaching 67% in patients completing neoadjuvant EV-Pembro, a majority of cystectomies are now removing cancer-free bladders. This creates an ethical and clinical imperative to rapidly launch prospective trials to validate bladder preservation strategies and avoid overtreatment.

An expert oncologist identified a pathological complete response (pCR) rate over 50% as the benchmark that would fundamentally alter treatment. The EV Pembro trial's 57% pCR rate crossed this threshold, forcing a shift from a surgery-centric model toward bladder preservation strategies and systemic therapy.

Improved Surgical Techniques Are Blurring the Lines Between 'Fit' and 'Unfit' Bladder Cancer Patients | RiffOn