Controversies in terminology associated with management of BCG-unresponsive NMIBC in Asia-Pacific.

OBJECTIVES: Examine the understanding of terminologies and management patterns of bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)-unresponsive nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) in six territories in Asia-Pacific. METHODS: This study involved two phases: (1) a survey with 32 urologists and 7 medical oncologists (MOs) and (2) a factorial experiment and in-depth interviews with 23 urologists and 2 MOs. All clinicians had ≥8 years' experience managing NMIBC patients in Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Data from Phase 1 were summarized using descriptive statistics; content and thematic analyses applied in Phase 2. RESULTS: In phase 1, 35% of clinicians defined BCG-unresponsive as BCG-refractory, -relapse and -resistant, 6% defined it as BCG-refractory and -relapse; 22% classified BCG-failure as BCG-refractory, -relapse, -resistant, and when muscle-invasive bladder cancer is detected. If eligible and willing, 50% (interquartile range [IQR], 50%-80%) of BCG-unresponsive patients would undergo radical cystectomy (RC), and 50% (IQR 20%-50%) of RC-eligible patients would receive bladder-sparing treatment or surveillance. In phase 2, we found that 32%, 88%, and 48% of clinicians, respectively, used "BCG-unresponsive," "BCG-refractory," and "BCG-relapse" in clinical practice but with no consistent interpretation of the terms. Compared with EAU definitions, 8%-60% of clinicians appropriately classified 9 tumor types that are persistent or recurrent after adequate BCG. Fifty percent of clinicians mentioned a lack of bladder-preserving treatment that outperforms RC in quality of life as a reason to retreat BCG-unresponsive patients with BCG. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed varied understanding and application of BCG-unresponsive terminologies in practice. There is a need for a uniform and simple definition of BCG-unresponsive disease in Asia-Pacific.

Risk stratification and management of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A physician survey in six Asia-Pacific territories.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple clinical practice guidelines, conflicting evidence, and physician perceptions result in variations in risk stratification among patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). This study aims to describe the extent of this variation and its impact on management approaches in the Asia-Pacific region. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey involving 32 urologists and seven medical oncologists with ≥8 years of experience managing early-stage bladder cancer patients across Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. The physicians completed an anonymous questionnaire that assessed their risk stratification and respective management approaches, based on 19 NMIBC characteristics. For each NMIBC characteristic, they were required to select one risk group, and their most preferred management approach. RESULTS: Our results demonstrated a higher consensus on risk classification versus management approaches. More than 50% of the respondents agreed on the risk classification of all NMIBC characteristics, but 42% or fewer chose the same treatment option as their preferred choice for all but two characteristics-existence of variant histology (55%) and persistent high-grade T1 disease on repeat resection (52%). Across territories, there was the greatest variation in preferred treatment options (i.e., no treatment, intravesical chemotherapy, or Bacillus Calmette-Guérin [BCG] treatment) for intermediate-risk patients and the highest consensus on the treatment of very high-risk patients, namely radical cystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed considerable variation in risk stratification and management of NMIBC in the region. It is critical to develop practical algorithms to facilitate the recognition of NMIBC and standardize the treatment of NMIBC patients.

Clinical decision pathway and management of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: A multidisciplinary consensus in Asia-Pacific.

OBJECTIVES: To develop consensus on patient characteristics and disease-related factors considered in deciding treatment approaches for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA-HNSCC) based on real-world treatment patterns in 4 territories in Asia-Pacific. METHODS: A three-round modified Delphi involving a multidisciplinary panel of HN surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists was used. Of 41 panelists recruited, responses of 26 from Australia, Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan were analyzed. All panelists had ≥five years' experience managing LA-HNSCC patients and treated ≥15 patients with LA-HNSCC annually. RESULTS: All statements on definitions of LA-HNSCC, treatment intolerance and cisplatin dosing reached consensus. 4 of 7 statements on unresectability, 2 of 4 on adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 7 of 13 on induction chemotherapy, 1 of 8 on absolute contraindications and 7 of 11 on relative contraindications to high-dose cisplatin did not reach consensus. In all territories except Taiwan, high-dose cisplatin was preferred in definitive and adjuvant settings for patients with no contraindications to cisplatin; weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m2) preferred for patients with relative contraindications to high-dose cisplatin. For Taiwan, the main treatment option was weekly cisplatin. For patients with absolute contraindications to cisplatin, carboplatin ± 5-fluorouracil or radiotherapy alone were preferred alternatives in both definitive and adjuvant settings. CONCLUSION: This multidisciplinary consensus provides insights into management of LA-HNSCC in Asia-Pacific based on patient- and disease-related factors that guide selection of treatment modality and systemic treatment. Despite strong consensus on use of cisplatin-based regimens, areas of non-consensus showed that variability in practice exists where there is limited evidence.

A systematic review to summarize treatment patterns, guidelines, and characteristics of patients with renal cell carcinoma in the Asia-Pacific region.

INTRODUCTION: This systematic review evaluated treatment patterns and guidelines in advanced/metastatic and adjuvant renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the Asia-Pacific region. AREAS COVERED: Embase, PubMed, and congresses were searched for observational studies and guidelines in accordance with PRISMA. Records published during 2016-2021 (2019-2021 for congresses) were included. EXPERT OPINION: Nine studies and three guidelines were identified overall. In advanced/metastatic RCC, the most common treatments were tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (notably sunitinib: 33-100%) for first-line, and everolimus (13-85%) or axitinib (2-89%) for second-line therapy. In adjuvant RCC, sunitinib was most used (54%), followed by mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTORis, 27%) with immunotherapy being less common (16%). The guidelines provided varying recommendations for advanced/metastatic RCC. For first-line in advanced/metastatic clear cell RCC (the most common subtype), guidelines recommended mTORis (everolimus for poor-risk patients) (India, 2016); clinical study enrollment for high-risk patients or TKIs for low- to medium-risk patients (China, 2019); or immunotherapy based on survival benefits over sunitinib; dose adjustment was also recommended to manage TKI toxicities (Hong Kong, 2019). The landscape remained more static in the adjuvant setting, but best practice was uncertain. No clear trends were identified in patient characteristics.

Antiemetic therapy in Asia Pacific countries for patients receiving moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy--a descriptive analysis of practice patterns, antiemetic quality of care, and use of antiemetic guidelines.

PURPOSE: This paper reports prescribing patterns for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) after highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC or MEC) for cancer in six Asia Pacific countries. METHODS: In a prospective noninterventional study, 31 sites in Australia, China, India, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan recorded details of CINV prophylaxis for the acute phase (first 24 h) and delayed phase (days 2-5) after single-day HEC or MEC for adult patients. Additional information on CINV prophylactic medications was collected from 6-day patient diaries. Primary antiemetic therapies were defined as corticosteroids, the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5HT3-RAs), and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1-RAs). RESULTS: Evaluable patients in cycle 1 numbered 648 (318 [49%] HEC and 330 [51%] MEC) of mean (SD) age of 56 (12) years, including 58% women. For the acute phase after HEC, overall (and country range), 96% (91-100%) of patients received a 5HT3-RA, 87% (70-100%) a corticosteroid, and 43% (0-91%) an NK1-RA. CINV prophylaxis for the HEC delayed phase was more variable: including 22% (7-65%) 5HT3-RA, 52% (12-93%) corticosteroid, and 46% (0-88%) NK1-RA. For the MEC acute phase, 97% (87-100%) of patients received 5HT3-RA and 86% (73-97%) a corticosteroid. For the MEC delayed phase, 201 patients (61%) received a primary antiemetic, including 5HT3-RA (41%), corticosteroid (37%), and/or NK1-RA (4%). CONCLUSIONS: The 5HT3-RAs were prescribed consistently in all countries, while prescribing of other antiemetic therapies was variable, and corticosteroids were under-prescribed for CINV prophylaxis, particularly in the delayed phase.