Arnulf Stenzl

Prof. Arnulf Stenzl

Eberhard Karls University of Tuebingen
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

31Years (1996-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2011 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Arnulf StenzlArnulf Stenzl
Arnulf Stenzl
NCNigel C. Cowan
Nigel C. Cowan
MSMaria De Santis
Maria De Santis
MKMarkus A. Kuczyk
Markus A. Kuczyk
AMAxel S. Merseburger
Axel S. Merseburger
JWJ. Alfred Witjes
J. Alfred Witjes

1 November 2013 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MBMaximilian Burger
Maximilian Burger
HGH. Barton Grossman
H. Barton Grossman
MDMichael Droller
Michael Droller
JSJoerg Schmidbauer
Joerg Schmidbauer
GHGregers Hermann
Gregers Hermann
DJDieter Jocham
Dieter Jocham

1 April 2013 in Journal of Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DGDavid A. Green
David A. Green
MRMichael Rink
Michael Rink
EXEvanguelos Xylinas
Evanguelos Xylinas
SMSurena F. Matin
Surena F. Matin
Arnulf StenzlArnulf Stenzl
Arnulf Stenzl
SSShahrokh F. Shariat
Shahrokh F. Shariat
Urothelial carcinoma of the bladder is the 4th most common malignancy in men and the 8th most common cause of male cancer death in the United States. Conversely, upper tract urothelial carcinoma accounts for only 5% to 10% of all urothelial carcinoma. Due to the relative preponderance of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, much of the clinical decision making regarding upper tract urothelial carcinoma is extrapolated from evidence that is based on urothelial carcinoma of the bladder cohorts. In fact, only 1 major urological organization has treatment guidelines specific for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. While significant similarities exist between these 2 diseases, ignoring the important differences may be preventing us from optimizing therapy in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Therefore, we explored these dissimilarities, including the differential importance of gender, anatomy, staging, intracavitary therapy, surgical lymphadenectomy and perioperative systemic chemotherapy on the behavior of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and upper tract urothelial carcinoma. A nonsystematic literature search using the MEDLINE/PubMed® database was conducted to identify original articles, review articles and editorials. Searches were limited to the English language and studies in humans and in adults, and used the key words urothelial carcinoma, upper tract urothelial carcinoma or transitional cell carcinoma combined with several different sets of key words to identify appropriate publications for each section of the manuscript. The key words, broken down by section, were 1) epidemiology, sex, gender; 2) location, tumor location; 3) staging, stage; 4) intracavitary, intravesical, topical therapy; 5) lymphadenectomy, lymph node, lymph node dissection and 6) adjuvant, neoadjuvant, chemotherapy. Women who present with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder do so with less favorable tumor characteristics and have worse survival than men. However, gender does not appear to be associated with survival outcomes in upper tract urothelial carcinoma. The prognostic effect that urothelial carcinoma tumor location has on outcomes prediction is a matter of debate, and the influence of tumor location may reflect our technical ability to accurately stage and treat the disease more than the actual tumor biology. Moreover, technical limitations of upper tract urothelial carcinoma sampling compared to transurethral resection for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder are the most important source of staging differences between the 2 diseases. Intravesical chemotherapy and immunotherapy are essential components of standard of care for most nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer, while adjuvant intracavitary therapy for patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma treated endoscopically or percutaneously has been sparsely used and without any clear guidelines. The widespread adoption of the use of intracavitary therapy in the upper tract will likely not only require additional data to support its efficacy, but will also require a less cumbersome means of administration. Lymphadenectomy at the time of radical cystectomy is widely accepted while lymphadenectomy at the time of radical nephroureterectomy is performed largely at the discretion of the surgeon. Among other reasons, this may be due in part to the variable lymphatic drainage along the course of the ureter compared to the relatively confined lymphatic landing sites for the bladder. Level I evidence has demonstrated a clear survival benefit for systemic chemotherapy before radical surgery or radiation in patients with clinical T2-4N0M0 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Such data are not available in the population with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. However, the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be even more important in upper tract urothelial carcinoma than in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder because of the obligatory kidney function loss that occurs at radical nephroureterectomy. While urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and upper tract urothelial carcinoma share many characteristics, they represent 2 distinct diseases. There are practical, anatomical, biological and molecular differences that warrant consideration when risk stratifying and treating patients with these disparate twin diseases. To overcome the challenges that impede progress toward evidence-based medicine in upper tract urothelial carcinoma, we believe that focused collaborative efforts will best augment our understanding of this rare disease and ultimately improve the care we deliver to our patients.

13 December 2013 in BJU International
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RLRichard K. Lee
Richard K. Lee
HAHassan Abol‐Enein
Hassan Abol‐Enein
WAWalter Artibani
Walter Artibani
BBBernard Bochner
Bernard Bochner
GDGuido Dalbagni
Guido Dalbagni
SSShahrokh F. Shariat
Shahrokh F. Shariat
Context: The urinary reconstructive options available after radical cystectomy ( RC ) for bladder cancer are discussed, as are the criteria for selection of the most appropriate diversion, and the outcomes and complications associated with different diversion options. Objective: To critically review the peer‐reviewed literature on the function and oncological outcomes, complications, and factors influencing choice of procedure with urinary diversion after RC for bladder carcinoma. Evidence Acquisition: A Medline search was conducted to identify original articles, review articles, and editorials on urinary diversion in patients treated with RC . Searches were limited to the E nglish language. Keywords included: ‘bladder cancer’, ‘cystectomy’, ‘diversion’, ‘neobladder’, and ‘conduit’. The articles with the highest level of evidence were selected and reviewed, with the consensus of all of the authors of this paper. Evidence Synthesis: Both continent and incontinent diversions are available for urinary reconstruction after RC . In appropriately selected patients, an orthotopic neobladder permits the elimination of an external stoma and preservation of body image without compromising cancer control. However, the patient must be fully educated and committed to the labour‐intensive rehabilitation process. He must also be able to perform self‐catheterisation if necessary. When involvement of the urinary outflow tract by tumour prevents the use of an orthotopic neobladder, a continent cutaneous reservoir may still offer the opportunity for continence albeit one that requires obligate self‐catheterisation. For patients who are not candidates for continent diversion, the ileal loop remains an acceptable and reliable option. Conclusions: Both continent and incontinent diversions are available for urinary reconstruction after RC . Orthotopic neobladders optimally preserve body image, while continent cutaneous diversions represent a reasonable alternative. Ileal conduits represent the fastest, easiest, least complication‐prone, and most commonly performed urinary diversion.

1 April 2009 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Arnulf StenzlArnulf Stenzl
Arnulf Stenzl
NCNigel C. Cowan
Nigel C. Cowan
MSMaria De Santis
Maria De Santis
GJGerhard Jakse
Gerhard Jakse
MKMarcus A. Kuczyk
Marcus A. Kuczyk
JWJ. Alfred Witjes
J. Alfred Witjes

16 June 2015 in Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HKHubert Kübler
Hubert Kübler
BSBirgit Scheel
Birgit Scheel
UGUlrike Gnad-Vogt
Ulrike Gnad-Vogt
KMKurt Miller
Kurt Miller
WSWolfgang Schultze-Seemann
Wolfgang Schultze-Seemann
Arnulf StenzlArnulf Stenzl
Arnulf Stenzl
Background CV9103 is a prostate-cancer vaccine containing self-adjuvanted mRNA (RNActive®) encoding the antigens PSA, PSCA, PSMA, and STEAP1. This phase I/IIa study evaluated safety and immunogenicity of CV9103 in patients with advanced castration-resistant prostate-cancer. Methods 44 Patients received up to 5 intra-dermal vaccinations. Three dose levels of total mRNA were tested in Phase I in cohorts of 3–6 patients to determine a recommended dose. In phase II, 32 additional patients were treated at the recommended dose. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability, the secondary endpoint was induction of antigen specific immune responses monitored at baseline and at weeks 5, 9 and 17. Results The most frequent adverse events were grade 1/2 injection site erythema, injection site reactions, fatigue, pyrexia, chills and influenza-like illness. Possibly treatment related urinary retention occurred in 3 patients. The recommended dose was 1280 μg. A total of 26/33 evaluable patients treated at 1280 μg developed an immune response, directed against multiple antigens in 15 out of 33 patients. One patient showed a confirmed PSA response. In the subgroup of 36 metastatic patients, the Kaplan-Meier estimate of median overall survival was 31.4 months [95 % CI: 21.2; n.a]. Conclusions The self-adjuvanted RNActive® vaccine CV9103 was well tolerated and immunogenic. The technology is a versatile, fast and cost-effective platform allowing for creation of vaccines. The follow-up vaccine CV9104 including the additional antigens prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) and Muc1 is currently being tested in a randomized phase IIb trial to assess the clinical benefit induced by this new vaccination approach. Trial registration EU Clinical Trials Register: EudraCT number 2008-003967-37, registered 27 Jan 2009.