Clinical Trial Protocol for "Replace Cysto": Replacing Invasive Cystoscopy with Urine Testing for Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Surveillance-A Multicenter, Randomized, Phase 2 Healthcare Delivery Trial Comparing Quality of Life During Cancer Surveillance with Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor or Bladder EpiCheck Urine Testing Versus Frequent Cystoscopy.

"Replace Cysto" is a multisite randomized phase 2 trial including 240 participants with low-grade intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, in which participants will be randomized 1:1:1 to one of two urine marker-based approaches alternating a urine marker test (Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor or Bladder EpiCheck) with cystoscopy or to frequent scheduled cystoscopy. The primary objective is to determine whether urinary quality of life after surveillance is significantly improved in the urine marker arms. The primary outcome will be the patient-reported urinary quality of life domain score of the validated QLQ-NMIBC24 instrument, measured 1-3 d after surveillance. Exploratory outcomes include discomfort after surveillance, the number of invasive procedures that participants undergo per 1000 person years, complications from these procedures per 1000 person years, nonurinary quality of life, acceptability of surveillance, and bladder cancer recurrence and progression. Comparators include surveillance using (1) the Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor test, (2) the Bladder EpiCheck urinary marker, or (3) frequent cystoscopy alone. After a negative cystoscopy ≤4 mo following bladder tumor resection, all the participants will undergo surveillance at 6, 12, 18, and 24 mo (with time zero defined as the date of the most recent bladder tumor resection). In the urine marker arms, surveillance at 6 and 18 mo will be performed with the marker. Regardless of the arm, participants will undergo cystoscopy at 12 and 24 mo. End of study for each participant will be their 24-mo cystoscopy. Overall trial duration is estimated at 5 yr from when the study opens to enrollment until completion of data analyses. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05796375).

Simulation of the effects of molecular urine markers in follow-up of patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.

A plethora of urine markers for the management of patients with bladder cancer has been developed and studied in the past. However, the clinical impact of urine testing on patient management remains obscure. The goal of this manuscript is to identify scenarios for the potential use of molecular urine markers in the follow-up of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive BC (NMIBC) and estimate potential risks and benefits. Information on the course of disease of patients with high-risk NMIBC and performance data of a point-of-care test (UBC rapid™), an MCM-5 directed ELISA (ADXBLADDER™), and 2 additional novel assays targeting alterations of mRNA expression and DNA methylation (Xpert bladder cancer monitor™, Epicheck™) were retrieved from high-quality trials and/or meta-analyses. In addition, the sensitivity of white light cystoscopy (WLC) and the impact of a urine marker result on the performance of WLC were estimated based on fluorescence cystoscopy data and information from the CeFub trial. This information was applied to different scenarios in patient follow-up and sensitivity, estimated number of cystoscopies, and the numbers needed to diagnose were calculated. The sensitivity of guideline-based regular follow-up (SOC) at 1 year was calculated at 96%. For different marker-supported strategies sensitivities ranging from 77% to 97.9% were estimated. Calculations suggest that several strategies are effective for the SOC. While for the SOC 24.6 WLCs were required to diagnose 1 tumor recurrence (NND), this NND dropped below 5 in some marker-supported strategies. Based on the results of this simulation, a marker-supported follow-up of patients with HR NMIBC is safe and offers the option to significantly reduce the number of WLCs. Further research focusing on prospective randomized trials is needed to finally find a way to implement urine markers into clinical decision-making.

Considering the Effects of Modern Point-of-Care Urine Biomarker Assays in Follow-Up of Patients with High-Risk Non-muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although a plethora of urine markers for diagnosis and follow-up of patients with bladder cancer (BC) has been developed and studied, the clinical impact of urine testing on patient management remains unclear. The goal of this manuscript is to identify scenarios for a potential use of modern point-of-care (POC) urine marker assays in the follow-up of patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive BC (NMIBC) and estimate potential risks and benefits. METHODS: To permit comparison between different assays, the results of 5 different POC assays studied in a recent prospective multicenter study including 127 patients with suspicious cystoscopy undergoing TURB were used for this simulation. For the current standard of care (SOC), a "marker-enforced" procedure, and a combined strategy sensitivity (Se), estimated number of cystoscopies, and the numbers needed to diagnose (NND) over a 1-year follow-up period were calculated. RESULTS: For regular cystoscopy (SOC), a Se of 91.7% and a NND of 42.2 repetitive office cystoscopies (WLCs) for 1 recurrent tumor at 1 year were calculated. For the "marker-enforced" strategy, marker sensitivities between 94.7% and 97.1% were observed. The "combined" strategy yielded for markers with a Se exceeding 50% an overall Se at 1 year similar or superior to the current SOC. Savings regarding the number of cystoscopies in the "marker-enforced" strategy vs. the SOC were small, while, depending on the marker, up to 45% of all cystoscopies may be saved using the "combined" strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this simulation, a marker-supported follow-up of patients with high-risk (HR) NMIBC is safe and offers options to significantly reduce the number of cystoscopies without compromising the Se. Further research focusing on prospective randomized trials is needed to finally find a way to include marker results into clinical decision-making.

Sensitivity and Specificity in Urine Bladder Cancer Markers - Is it that Simple?

Marker research, and in particular urine bladder cancer marker research throughout the past three decades, devours enormous scientific resources in terms of manpower (not to mention time spent on reviewing and editorial efforts) and financial resources, finally generating large numbers of manuscripts without affecting clinical decision making. This is mirrored by the fact that current guidelines do not recommend marker use due to missing level 1 evidence. Although we recognize the problems and obstacles, the authors of this commentary feel that the time has come to abandon the current procedures and move on to prospective trial designs implementing marker results into clinical decision making. Our thoughts and concerns are summarized in this comment.

Toward noninvasive follow-up of low-risk bladder cancer - Rationale and concept of the UroFollow trial.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up recommendations for patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) are largely based upon expert opinion. A growing body of evidence suggests that current follow-up strategies for bladder cancer patients with low and intermediate risk represent overdiagnosis and may lead to overtreatment. The goal of this study is to explore the options of a noninvasive follow-up in patients with pTa G1-2/low-grade NMIBC. METHODS: The risks and options for a urine marker-guided, noninvasive follow-up of patients with pTa G1-2/low-grade NMIBC were defined and the study design for a prospective randomized trial (UroFollow) was developed based upon the current literature. RESULTS: The investigators postulated that follow-up of patients with pTa G1-2/low-grade NMIBC requires a high sensitivity of urinary tumor markers. However, data from prospective studies with prediagnostic urine samples are scarce, even for approved markers, and cross-sectional studies with symptomatic patients overestimate the sensitivity. So far, cell-based markers (e.g., uCyt+ and UroVysion) in urine appeared to have higher sensitivities and specificities in low-grade NMIBC than urine cytology and markers analyzing soluble tumor-associated antigens. Marker panels are more sensitive than single-marker approaches at the expense of a lower specificity. Given a prospective randomized comparison with a marker sensitivity of 80% compared to usual care with cystoscopy, the sample size calculation yielded that 62 to 185 patients under study per arm are needed depending on different recurrence rates. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon these findings the UroFollow trial has been designed as a prospective randomized study comparing a noninvasive marker-based (UroVysion, NMP22, urine cytology, and ultrasound) follow-up with the current standard of care over a period of 3 years.