Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference. Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), and 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach. This report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.

Purpose: Primary staging of prostate cancer relies on modalities, which are limited. We evaluate simultaneous [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET (PSMA-PET)/MRI as a new diagnostic method for primary tumor–node–metastasis staging compared with histology and its impact on therapeutic decisions. Experimental Design: We investigated 122 patients with PSMA-PET/MRI prior to planned radical prostatectomy (RP). Primary endpoint was the accuracy of PSMA-PET/MRI in tumor staging as compared with staging-relevant histology. In addition, a multidisciplinary team reassessed the initial therapeutic approach to evaluate its impact on the therapeutic management. Results: PSMA-PET/MRI correctly identified prostate cancer in 119 of 122 patients (97.5%). Eighty-one patients were treated with RP and pelvic lymphadenectomy. The accuracy for T staging was 82.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 73–90; P < 0.001], for T2 stage was 85% (95% CI, 71–94; P < 0.001), for T3a stage was 79% (95% CI, 43–85; P < 0.001), for T3b stage was 94% (95% CI, 73–100; P < 0.001), and for N1 stage was 93% (95% CI, 84–98; P < 0.001). PSMA-PET/MRI changed the therapeutic strategy in 28.7% of the patients with either the onset of systemic therapy/radiotherapy (n = 16) or active surveillance (n = 19). Conclusions: PSMA-PET/MRI can provide an accurate staging of newly diagnosed prostate cancer. In addition, treatment strategies were changed in almost a third of the patients due to the information of this hybrid imaging technique.

The first aim of this study was to evaluate ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA^HBED-CC conjugate 11 positron emission tomography (PSMA PET) parameters for assessment of response to ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy (RLT) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The second aim was to investigate factors associated with overall survival (OS).

Objective To evaluate the diagnostic performance of [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA^HBED-CC conjugate 11 positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) in the early detection of metastases in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) for clinically non-metastatic prostate cancer, to compare it to CT/MRI alone and to assess its impact on further therapeutic decisions. Material and methods We retrospectively assessed 117 consecutive hormone-naïve BCR patients who had ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA 11 PET/CT (n = 46) or PET/MRI (n = 71) between May 2014 and January 2017. BCR was defined as two PSA rises above 0.2 ng/ml. Two dedicated uro-oncological imaging experts (radiology/nuclear medicine) reviewed separately all images. All results were presented in a blinded sequential fashion to a multidisciplinary tumorboard in order to assess the influence of PSMA-PET imaging on decision-making. Results The median time from RP to BCR was 36 months (IQR 16–72). Overall, 69 (59%) patients received postoperative radiotherapy. Median PSA level at the time of imaging was 1.04 ng/ml (IQR 0.58–1.87). PSMA-positive lesions were detected in 100 (85.5%) patients. Detection rates were 65% for a PSA value of 0.2 to <0.5 ng/ml, 85.7% for 0.5 to <1, 85.7% for 1 to <2 and 100% for ≥2. PSMA-positive lesions could be confirmed by either histology (16%), PSA decrease in metastasis-directed radiotherapy (45%) or additional information in diffusion-weighted imaging when PET/MRI was performed (18%) in 79% of patients. PSMA-PET detected lesions in 67 patients (57.3%) who had no suspicious correlates according to the RECIST 1.1 criteria on MRI or CT. PSMA-PET changed therapeutic decisions in 74.6% of these 67 patients (p < 0.001), with 86% of them being considered for metastases-directed therapies. Conclusions We confirm the high performance of PSMA-PET imaging for the detection of disease recurrence sites in patients with BCR after RP, even at relatively low PSA levels. Moreover, it adds significant information to standard CT/MRI, changing treatment strategies in a significant number of patients.

Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.