The impact of low-versus high-intensity surveillance cystoscopy on surgical care and cancer outcomes in patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC)

Abstract

Purpose To assess the association of low- vs. guideline-recommended high-intensity cystoscopic surveillance with outcomes among patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Materials & methods A retrospective cohort study of Veterans Affairs patients diagnosed with high-risk NMIBC between 2005 and 2011 with follow-up through 2014. Patients were categorized by number of surveillance cystoscopies over two years following diagnosis: Low- (1-5) vs. high-intensity (6 or more) surveillance. Propensity score adjusted regression models were used to assess the association of low-intensity cystoscopic surveillance with frequency of transurethral resections, and risk of progression to invasive disease and bladder cancer death. Results Among 1,542 patients, 520 (33.7%) underwent low-intensity cystoscopic surveillance. Patients undergoing low-intensity surveillance had fewer transurethral resections (37 vs. 99 per 100 person-years; p<0.001). Risk of death from bladder cancer did not differ significantly by low (cumulative incidence [CIn] 8.4% [95% CI 6.5-10.9) at 5 years) vs. high-intensity surveillance (CIn 9.1% [95% CI 7.4-11.2) at 5 years, p = 0.61). Low vs. high-intensity surveillance was not associated with increased risk of bladder cancer death among patients with Ta (CIn 5.7% vs. 8.2% at 5 years p = 0.24) or T1 disease at diagnosis (CIn 10.2% vs. 9.1% at 5 years, p = 0.58). Among patients with Ta disease, low-intensity surveillance was associated with decreased risk of progression to invasive disease (T1 or T2) or bladder cancer death (CIn 19.3% vs. 31.3% at 5 years, p = 0.002). Conclusions Patients with high-risk NMIBC undergoing low- vs. high-intensity cystoscopic surveillance underwent fewer transurethral resections, but did not experience an increased risk of progression or bladder cancer death. These findings provide a strong rationale for a clinical trial to determine whether low-intensity surveillance is comparable to high-intensity surveillance for cancer control in high-risk NMIBC.