Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Kurzform der S3-Leitlinie Harnblasenkarzinom

Short version of the German S3 guideline for bladder cancer

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Das Harnblasenkarzinom ist die zweithäufigste urologische Tumorerkrankung. Die S3-Leitlinie Harnblasenkarzinom wurde gemeinsam mit dem Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Medizinisch Wissenschaftlicher Fachgesellschaften e. V. (AWMF), der Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft und der Deutschen Krebshilfe unter Beteiligung von weiteren 31 medizinischen Fachgesellschaften erstellt. Die Kurzversion soll Auszüge an Empfehlungen aus der S3-Leitlinie Blasenkarzinom vorstellen. Die Empfehlungen basieren auf systematischen Literaturrecherchen und Expertenmeinungen und wurden von Blasenkarzinomexperten und Gesellschaften abgestimmt. Die Langversion der S3-Leitlinie Harnblasenkarzinom kann unter dem Link http://leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/ eingesehen werden.

Abstract

Urinary bladder cancer is the second most common cancer of the urogenital system. The Guideline Program in Oncology (Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie) of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften, AWMF), the German Cancer Society (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft) and the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe) as well as 31 different medical societies have developed the first interdisciplinary, evidence-based German guideline for bladder cancer. This short version presents the resulting series of diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations which were based on a systematic literature search and approved by a team of bladder cancer experts. The full version is available under http://leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

AWMF:

Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e. V.

SIGN:

„Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network“

EK:

Expertenkonsens

NMP22:

Nukleäres Matrixprotein 22

FISH:

Floureszenz-in-situ-Hybridisierung

BTA:

Blasentumorantigen

CT:

Computertomographie

MRT:

Magnetresonanztomographie

TUR-B:

Transuretrale Resektion der Blase

TUR:

Transuretrale Resektion

HAL:

Hexaminolävulinsäure

WL:

Weißlicht

EORTC:

„European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer“

BCG:

Bacille Calmette-Guerin

LK:

Lymphknoten

GC:

Gemcitabin, Cisplatin

MVAC:

Methotrexat, Vinblastin, Doxorubicin und Cisplatin

CR:

„Complete response“

PR:

„Partial response“

AP:

Alkalische Phosphatase

BSC:

„Best supportive care“

PS:

Performancestatus

HR:

Hazard Ratio

KI:

Konfidenzintervall

PD-L1:

„Programed death ligand-1“

NMIBC:

Nicht-muskelinvasives Blasenkarzinom

AUG:

Ausscheidungsurogramm

NICE:

„National Institute for Health and Care Excellence“

Literatur

  1. Goessl C et al (1997) Is routine excretory urography necessary at first diagnosis of bladder cancer? J Urol 157(2):480–481

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Herranz-Amo F et al (1999) Need for intravenous urography in patients with primary transitional carcinoma of the bladder? Eur Urol 36(3):221–224

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Palou J et al (2005) Multivariate analysis of clinical parameters of synchronous primary superficial bladder cancer and upper urinary tract tumor. J Urol 174(3):859–861 (discussion 861)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Millan-Rodriguez F et al (2000) Upper urinary tract tumors after primary superficial bladder tumors: prognostic factors and risk groups. J Urol 164(4):1183–1187

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Van Der Molen AJ et al (2008) CT urography: definition, indications and techniques. A guideline for clinical practice. Eur Radiol 18(1):4–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hermann GG et al (2011) Fluorescence – guided transurethral resection of bladder tumours reduces bladder tumour recurrence due to less residual tumour tissue in T a/T1 patients: a randomized two – centre study. BJU Int 108(8 b):E297–E303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stenzl A et al (2010) Hexaminolevulinate guided fluorescence cystoscopy reduces recurrence in patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol 184(5):1907–1913

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Geavlete B et al (2010) HAL blue-light cystoscopy in high-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer – re-TURBT recurrence rates in a prospective, randomized study. Urology 76(3):664–669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Karaolides T et al (2012) Hexaminolevulinate-induced fluorescence versus white light during transurethral resection of noninvasive bladder tumor: does it reduce recurrences? Urology 80(2):354–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yuan H et al (2013) Therapeutic outcome of fluorescence cystoscopy guided transurethral resection in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE 8(9):e74142

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Shen P et al (2012) Effects of fluorescent light-guided transurethral resection on non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int 110(6 Pt B):E209–E215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yang LP (2014) Hexaminolevulinate blue light cystoscopy: A review of its use in the diagnosis of bladder cancer. Mol Diagnosis Ther 18(1):105–116

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rink M et al (2013) Hexyl aminolevulinate-guided fluorescence cystoscopy in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a critical review of the current literature. Eur Urol 64(4):624–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bohle A, Bock PR (2004) Intravesical bacille Calmette-Guerin versus mitomycin C in superficial bladder cancer: formal meta-analysis of comparative studies on tumor progression. Urology 63(4):682–686 (discussion 686–7)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sylvester RJ, van der Adrian MA, Lamm DL (2002) Intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guerin reduces the risk of progression in patients with superficial bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of the published results of randomized clinical trials. J Urol 168(5):1964–1970

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sylvester RJ et al (2010) Long-term efficacy results of EORTC genito-urinary group randomized phase 3 study 30911 comparing intravesical instillations of epirubicin, bacillus Calmette-Guerin, and bacillus Calmette-Guerin plus isoniazid in patients with intermediate- and high-risk stage Ta T1 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 57(5):766–773

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Malmstrom PU et al (2009) An individual patient data meta-analysis of the long-term outcome of randomised studies comparing intravesical mitomycin C versus bacillus Calmette-Guerin for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Eur Urol 56(2):247–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shang PF et al (2011) Intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guerin versus epirubicin for Ta and T1 bladder cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5:Cd006885

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fernandez-Gomez J et al (2011) The EORTC tables overestimate the risk of recurrence and progression in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with bacillus Calmette-Guerin: external validation of the EORTC risk tables. Eur Urol 60(3):423–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Shelley MD et al (2001) A systematic review of intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guerin plus transurethral resection vs transurethral resection alone in Ta and T1 bladder cancer. BJU Int 88(3):209–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shelley MD et al (2004) Intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guerin is superior to mitomycin C in reducing tumour recurrence in high-risk superficial bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. BJU Int 93(4):485–490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gardmark T et al (2007) Analysis of progression and survival after 10 years of a randomized prospective study comparing mitomycin-C and bacillus Calmette-Guerin in patients with high-risk bladder cancer. BJU Int 99(4):817–820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bohle A, Jocham D, Bock PR (2003) Intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guerin versus mitomycin C for superficial bladder cancer: a formal meta-analysis of comparative studies on recurrence and toxicity. J Urol 169(1):90–95

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lamm DL et al (2000) Maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin immunotherapy for recurrent TA, T1 and carcinoma in situ transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a randomized Southwest Oncology Group Study. J Urol 163(4):1124–1129

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tilki D et al (2010) Validation of the AJCC TNM substaging of pT2 bladder cancer: deep muscle invasion is associated with significantly worse outcome. Eur Urol 58(1):112–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gray PJ et al (2014) Clinical-pathologic stage discrepancy in bladder cancer patients treated with radical cystectomy: results from the national cancer data base. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 88(5):1048–1056

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Herr HW et al (2004) Surgical factors influence bladder cancer outcomes: a cooperative group report. J Clin Oncol 22(14):2781–2789

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. May M et al (2011) Association between the number of dissected lymph nodes during pelvic lymphadenectomy and cancer-specific survival in patients with lymph node-negative urothelial carcinoma of the bladder undergoing radical cystectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 18(7):2018–2025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Simone G et al (2013) Stage-specific impact of extended versus standard pelvic lymph node dissection in radical cystectomy. Int J Urol 20(4):390–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Herr HW et al (2002) Impact of the number of lymph nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol 167(3):1295–1298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Weisbach L et al (2013) Lymph node dissection during radical cystectomy for bladder cancer treatment: considerations on relevance and extent. Int Urol Nephrol 45(6):1561–1567

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kitamura H, Masumori N, Tsukamoto T (2011) Role of lymph node dissection in management of bladder cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 16(3):179–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Karl A et al (2009) The impact of lymphadenectomy and lymph node metastasis on the outcomes of radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Eur Urol 55(4):826–835

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Zehnder P et al (2011) Super extended versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a comparative study. J Urol 186(4):1261–1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Koppie TM et al (2006) Standardization of pelvic lymphadenectomy performed at radical cystectomy: can we establish a minimum number of lymph nodes that should be removed? Cancer 107(10):2368–2374

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Colombo JR Jr., Haber GP, Gill IS (2008) Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in patients with compromised renal function. Urology 71(6):1043–1048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, D.K., AWMF) S3 Leitlinie Kolorektales Karzinom. Langversion 1.0. http://leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/Leitnienien,7.0.html. Zugegriffen: 18.07.2016

  38. Millan M et al (2010) Preoperative stoma siting and education by stomatherapists of colorectal cancer patients: a descriptive study in twelve Spanish colorectal surgical units. Colorectal Dis 12(7 Online):e88–92

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, D.K., AWMF) (2013) S3 Leitlinie Kolorektales Karzinom. Langversion 1.0. http://leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/Kolorektales-Karzinom.62.0.html. Zugegriffen: 18.07.2016

  40. Bass EM et al (1997) Does preoperative stoma marking and education by the enterostomal therapist affect outcome? Dis Colon Rectum 40(4):440–442

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Colwell JC, Gray M (2007) Does preoperative teaching and stoma site marking affect surgical outcomes in patients undergoing ostomy surgery? J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 34(5):492–496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Chaudhri S et al (2005) Preoperative intensive, community-based vs. traditional stoma education: a randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 48(3):504–509

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Schwenk W (2015) Moderne perioperative Behandlung. In: Kreis ME (Hrsg) Moderne Chirurgie des Rektumkarzinoms. Springer, Berlin

  44. Glatzle J, Longin I, Gruber G (2015) Stomaanlage und Stomatherapie. In: Kreis ME (Hrsg) Moderne Chirurgie des Rektumkarzinoms. Springer, Berlin

  45. Sternberg CN et al (1989) Methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin for advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium. Efficacy and patterns of response and relapse. Cancer 64(12):2448–2458

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Mead GM et al (1998) A randomized trial comparing methotrexate and vinblastine (MV) with cisplatin, methotrexate and vinblastine (CMV) in advanced transitional cell carcinoma: results and a report on prognostic factors in a Medical Research Council study. MRC Advanced Bladder Cancer Working Party. Br J Cancer 78(8):1067–1075

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. von der Maase H et al (2000) Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational, multicenter, phase III study. J Clin Oncol 18(17):3068–3077

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Bellmunt J et al (2012) Randomized phase III study comparing paclitaxel/cisplatin/gemcitabine and gemcitabine/cisplatin in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer without prior systemic therapy: EORTC Intergroup Study 30987. J Clin Oncol 30(10):1107–1113

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Sternberg CN et al (2001) Randomized phase III trial of high-dose-intensity methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) chemotherapy and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus classic MVAC in advanced urothelial tract tumors: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Protocol no. 30924. J Clin Oncol 19(10):2638–2646

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Bellmunt J et al (2009) Phase III trial of vinflunine plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone after a platinum-containing regimen in patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract. J Clin Oncol 27(27):4454–4461

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Bellmunt J et al (2013) Long-term survival results of a randomized phase III trial of vinflunine plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in advanced urothelial carcinoma patients after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 24(6):1466–1472

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sylvester RJ et al (2006) Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol 49(3):466–465 (discussion 475–7)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. NICE (2015) Bladder cancer: diagnosis and management. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng2. Zugegriffen 18.07.2016

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland

    M. Retz, J. E. Gschwend & P. Maisch

Authors
  1. M. Retz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. E. Gschwend
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Maisch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Retz.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

M. Retz: Vortragsvergütungen und Honorare von Astellas Pharma GmbH, Janssen-Cilag GmbH, Pfizer GmbH, Bayer AG, Amgen GmbH, Novartis AG und Roche GmbH; J. Gschwend: Vortragsvergütungen und Honorare von Astellas Pharma GmbH, Janssen-Cilag GmbH, Pfizer GmbH, Bayer AG, Amgen GmbH, Novartis AG und Roche GmbH; P. Maisch: Vortragsvergütungen von Pierre-Fabre Pharma GmbH und Reiseunterstützung von Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Retz, M., Gschwend, J.E. & Maisch, P. Kurzform der S3-Leitlinie Harnblasenkarzinom. Urologe 55, 1173–1187 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-016-0195-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-016-0195-1

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation