Patient reported treatment burden and attitudes towards in-home intravesical therapy among patients with bladder cancer.

PURPOSE: To quantify patient reported treatment burden while receiving intravesical therapy for bladder cancer and to survey patient perspectives on in-home intravesical therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network Patient Survey Network. Survey questions were developed by investigators, then iteratively revised by clinician and patient advocates. Eligible participants had to have received at least 1 dose of intravesical therapy delivered in an ambulatory setting. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-three patients responded to the survey with median age of 70 years (range 33-88 years). Two-thirds of respondents (66%, 151/232) had received greater than 12 bladder instillations. A travel time of >30 minutes to an intravesical treatment facility was reported by 55% (126/231) of respondents. Fifty-six percent (128/232) brought caregivers to their appointments, and 36% (82/230) missed work to receive treatment. Sixty-one respondents (26%) felt the process of receiving bladder instillations adversely affected their ability to perform regular daily activities. Among those surveyed, 72% (168/232) reported openness to receiving in-home intravesical instillations and 54% (122/228) answered that in-home instillations would make the treatment process less disruptive to their lives. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder cancer patients reported considerable travel distances, time requirements, and need for caregiver support when receiving intravesical therapy. Nearly three-quarters of survey respondents reported openness to receiving intravesical instillations in their home, with many identifying potential benefits for home over clinic-based therapy.

Protocol of the Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options (CISTO) study: a pragmatic, prospective multicenter observational cohort study of recurrent high-grade non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer poses a significant public health burden, with high recurrence and progression rates in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Current treatment options include bladder-sparing therapies (BST) and radical cystectomy, both with associated risks and benefits. However, evidence supporting optimal management decisions for patients with recurrent high-grade NMIBC remains limited, leading to uncertainty for patients and clinicians. The CISTO (Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options) Study aims to address this critical knowledge gap by comparing outcomes between patients undergoing BST and radical cystectomy. METHODS: The CISTO Study is a pragmatic, prospective observational cohort trial across 36 academic and community urology practices in the US. The study will enroll 572 patients with a diagnosis of recurrent high-grade NMIBC who select management with either BST or radical cystectomy. The primary outcome is health-related quality of life (QOL) at 12 months as measured with the EORTC-QLQ-C30. Secondary outcomes include bladder cancer-specific QOL, progression-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and financial toxicity. The study will also assess patient preferences for treatment outcomes. Statistical analyses will employ targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) to address treatment selection bias and confounding by indication. DISCUSSION: The CISTO Study is powered to detect clinically important differences in QOL and cancer-specific survival between the two treatment approaches. By including a diverse patient population, the study also aims to assess outcomes across the following patient characteristics: age, gender, race, burden of comorbid health conditions, cancer severity, caregiver status, social determinants of health, and rurality. Treatment outcomes may also vary by patient preferences, health literacy, and baseline QOL. The CISTO Study will fill a crucial evidence gap in the management of recurrent high-grade NMIBC, providing evidence-based guidance for patients and clinicians in choosing between BST and radical cystectomy. The CISTO study will provide an evidence-based approach to identifying the right treatment for the right patient at the right time in the challenging clinical setting of recurrent high-grade NMIBC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03933826. Registered on May 1, 2019.

Bladder cancer patient and provider perspectives on smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is the most common risk factor for bladder cancer and is associated with adverse clinical and cancer-related outcomes. Increasing understanding of the patient and provider perspectives on smoking cessation may provide insight into improving smoking cessation rates among bladder cancer survivors. We sought to inform strategies for providers promoting cessation efforts and help patients quit smoking. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi process with multidisciplinary input from bladder cancer providers, researchers, and a patient advocate, 2 surveys were created for bladder cancer patients and providers. Surveys included multiple-choice questions and free answers. The survey was administered electronically and queried participants' perspectives on barriers and facilitators associated with smoking cessation. Survey responses were anonymous, and participants were provided with a $20 Amazon gift card for participating. Patients were approached through the previously established Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network (BCAN) Patient Survey Network, an online bladder cancer patient and caregiver community. Providers were recruited from the Society of Urologic Oncology (SUO) and the Large Urology Group Practice Association (LUGPA). RESULTS: From May to June 2021, 308 patients and 103 providers completed their respective surveys. Among patients who quit smoking, most (64%) preferred no pharmacologic intervention ("cold turkey") followed by nicotine replacement therapy (28%). Repeated efforts at cessation commonly occurred, and 67% reported making more than one attempt at quitting prior to eventual smoking cessation. Approximately 1 in 10 patients were unaware of the association between bladder cancer and smoking. Among providers, 75% felt that barriers to provide cessation include a lack of clinical time, adequate training, and reimbursement concerns. However, 79% of providers endorsed a willingness to receive continuing education on smoking cessation. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder cancer patients utilize a variety of cessation strategies with "cold turkey" being the most used method, and many patients make multiple attempts at smoking cessation. Providers confront multiple barriers to conducting smoking cessation, including inadequate time and training in cessation methods; however, most would be willing to receive additional education. These results inform future interventions tailored to bladder cancer clinicians to better support provider efforts to provide smoking cessation counseling.

The effect of treatment on work productivity in patients with bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of bladder-preserving treatment vs. cystectomy on work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) among patients with bladder cancer. METHODS: Using cross-sectional survey data, we constructed 2-part models involving both logistic and linear prediction to describe the relationship between WPAI and treatment modality among patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). RESULTS: A total of 848 patients were included in the analysis. Patients with NMIBC who had cystectomy were more likely to experience activity impairment compared with those receiving bladder-preserving treatment (OR: 4.25, 95% CI: 2.28-7.93). Among patients with MIBC, cystectomy was protective against increasing presenteeism (e^ß: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.23-0.71) and productivity loss (e^ß: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.21-0.88); however, the opposite effect was seen for absenteeism treatment (e^ß: 4.82, 95% CI: 1.72-13.49). CONCLUSION: Cystectomy increased the odds of experiencing activity impairment for patients with NMIBC. However, for patients with MIBC, cystectomy appears to be protective for presenteeism and productivity loss. Further work is needed in order to better understand these important relationships and improve both patient counseling and shared decision-making.

Palliative care knowledge, attitudes, and experiences amongst patients with bladder cancer and their caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: Palliative care is underutilized amongst patients with bladder cancer despite guideline recommendations and known benefits. In order to uncover potential access barriers, we sought to describe patient and caregiver knowledge, attitudes and experiences surrounding palliative care. METHODS: We surveyed 272 patients with bladder cancer and their caregivers through the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network Patient Survey Network. In addition to collecting demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical characteristics, previously studied and validated questionnaires on palliative care knowledge and beliefs were administered. Patients and caregivers were also queried regarding their experiences with palliative care consultation. RESULTS: Survey respondents demonstrated highly accurate knowledge of palliative care services. Attitudes and beliefs surrounding palliative care were overall positive. Caregivers demonstrated better knowledge and more positive beliefs of palliative care compared to patients. Despite an overall positive sentiment toward palliative care, only 9% of the cohort had palliative care consultation as part of their cancer treatment plan. Most patients with muscle-invasive or metastatic bladder cancer wished that palliative care had been discussed by their providers. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of bladder cancer patients possess accurate knowledge and positive beliefs of palliative care. Palliative care is infrequently discussed during the treatment of bladder cancer, with patients and their caregivers expressing desire for palliative care to be discussed more often. Provider education surrounding palliative care services is imperative to improving access for bladder cancer patients and caregivers.

Delayed urologic cancer care in the COVID-19 pandemic: Patients' experiences.

OBJECTIVE: To understand experiences of patients with genitourinary cancer who experienced delayed cancer care due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study with an explanatory sequential design. Qualitative findings are reported here. Patients with muscle invasive bladder, advanced prostate or kidney cancer were eligible. Participants were selected for interviews if they self-reported low (0-3/10) or high (6-10/10) levels of distress on a previous survey. Participants were interviewed about their experiences. Interviews were transcribed, coded and categorised using thematic data analysis methodology. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were interviewed. Seven had prostate cancer, six bladder cancer and five kidney cancer. Six themes were derived from the interviews: (1) arriving at cancer diagnosis was hard enough, (2) response to treatment delay, (3) labelling cancer surgery as elective, (4) fear of COVID-19 infection, (5) quality of patient-provider relationship and communication and (6) what could have been done differently. CONCLUSION: These findings offer insight into the concerns of patients with genitourinary cancers who experienced treatment delays due to COVID-19. This information can be applied to support patients with cancers more broadly, should treatment delays occur in the future.

Urologic oncology patient perspectives during COVID-19 treatment delays.

PURPOSE: We sought to describe patient experiences during COVID-19 related delays in urologic cancer treatment. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study with an explanatory-sequential design. Survey findings are presented here. Patients from a Midwestern Cancer Center and the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network (BCAN) self-reported via survey their experience of treatment delay, patient-provider communication, and coping strategies. We quantified patient distress with an ordinal scale (0-10), based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (NCCN-DT). RESULTS: Forty-four patients with bladder, prostate, and kidney cancers consented to the survey. Most individuals were male (n = 29; 66%) and older than 61 years of age (n = 34; 77%). Median time since diagnosis was 6 months. Dominant reactions to treatment delay included fear that cancer would progress (n = 22; 50%) and relief at avoiding COVID-19 exposure (n = 19; 43%). Most patients reported feeling that their providers acknowledged their emotions (n = 31; 70%), yet 23 patients (52%) did not receive follow-up phone calls and only 24 (55%) felt continually supported by their providers. Patients' median distress level was 5/10 with 68% (n = 30) of patients reaching a clinically significant level of distress (≥ 4). Thematically grouped suggestions for providers included better communication, more personalized support, and better patient education. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a high proportion of urologic cancer patients reached a clinically significant level of distress. While they felt concern from providers, they desired more engagement and personalized care.

Refining neoadjuvant therapy clinical trial design for muscle-invasive bladder cancer before cystectomy: a joint US Food and Drug Administration and Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network workshop.

The success of the use of novel therapies in the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma has contributed to growing interest in evaluating these therapies at earlier stages of the disease. However, trials evaluating these therapies in the neoadjuvant setting must have clearly defined study elements and appropriately selected end points to ensure the applicability of the trial and enable interpretation of the study results. To advance the development of rational trial design, a public workshop jointly sponsored by the US Food and Drug Administration and the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network convened in August 2019. Clinicians, clinical trialists, radiologists, biostatisticians, patients, advocates and other stakeholders discussed key elements and end points when designing trials of neoadjuvant therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), identifying opportunities to refine eligibility, design and end points for neoadjuvant trials in MIBC. Although pathological complete response (pCR) is already being used as a co-primary end point, both individual-level and trial-level surrogacy for time-to-event end points, such as event-free survival or overall survival, remain incompletely characterized in MIBC. Additionally, use of pCR is limited by heterogeneity in pathological evaluation and the fact that the magnitude of pCR improvement that might translate into a meaningful clinical benefit remains unclear. Given existing knowledge gaps, capture of highly granular patient-related, tumour-related and treatment-related characteristics in the current generation of neoadjuvant MIBC trials will be critical to informing the design of future trials.

Patient and public involvement in the design and conduct of a large, pragmatic observational trial to investigate recurrent, high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered approaches to research design are particularly important for diseases with complex treatment decision-making, such as recurrent, high-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). The objective of this article is to describe patient and public involvement (PPI) in designing a large, pragmatic observational trial and to articulate barriers, challenges, and lessons learned for future design. METHODS: Through multistakeholder involvement, a large, pragmatic observational trial was designed to investigate the outcomes of high-risk, recurrent NMIBC, and it was titled Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options for Bladder Cancer (CISTO). CISTO's design used the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 reporting checklist for PPI and built on prior engagement infrastructure in partnership with the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network. RESULTS: CISTO's PPI began with research prioritization to identify the highest priority questions facing patients with NMIBC. A pragmatic observational study design was selected and refined through stakeholder input. PPI included patients and caregivers organized into an advocate advisory board and clinicians, researchers, payers, and industry representatives organized into an external advisory board. An engagement plan was created to define the stages of PPI and the level and nature of the involvement of each group. PPI was measured quantitatively and qualitatively through evaluation surveys and iterative feedback from board members, with changes made for continuous improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Through intentional PPI, CISTO aims to produce pragmatic and generalizable results that will allow patients to make informed decisions for recurrent, high-risk NMIBC based on their personal experiences. LAY SUMMARY: Involving patients and other stakeholders in research ensures that it reflects the outcomes that matter most to them. This is especially important when research focuses on conditions in which patients face difficult decisions about treatment options. This article describes the key role that stakeholders played in shaping the Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options for Bladder Cancer (CISTO) study. It compares treatments for recurrent noninvasive bladder cancer and describes how stakeholders were engaged to design and develop the study and the practices that supported their involvement.

Discomfort and relieving factors among patients with bladder cancer undergoing office-based cystoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the degree of discomfort among patients with bladder cancer undergoing office-based cystoscopy and identify factors and interventions that influence discomfort and anxiety. METHODS: We conducted a survey of the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network Patient Survey Network (BCAN PSN) to investigate the degree of discomfort associated with office-based cystoscopy and prevalence of interventions used to reduce discomfort. All patients had undergone at least one previous cystoscopy. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify factors associated with moderate-to-severe cystoscopy discomfort. RESULTS: Among 488 BCAN PSN respondents (50% response rate), 392 responded with demographic data and discomfort score. Cystoscopy was associated with moderate-to-severe discomfort in 52% of patients. Respondents who reported moderate-to-severe discomfort were more likely to describe their most recent cystoscopy discomfort as worse than prior (P<0.001) and to be interested in planning discomfort mitigation for cystoscopy (P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, gender was the only factor independently associated with discomfort, with women reporting less discomfort than men (OR 0.59, 95%CI 0.37-0.95,P=0.03). Patients reported a wide variety of cystoscopy-specific interventions with differing perceived effectiveness, the most common being intraurethral lidocaine. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of patients undergoing office-based cystoscopy for bladder cancer report moderate-to-severe discomfort, constituting a substantial problem among patients undergoing the procedure. Future large pragmatic comparative effectiveness trials are needed to better understand which interventions work most effectively to reduce discomfort associated with cystoscopy.

Patient empowerment through engagement in bladder cancer research.

BACKGROUND: The Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network's (BCAN) Patient Survey Network established a diverse bladder cancer patient community who contribute to the prioritization of bladder cancer research topics through surveys and summits. This study describes our experience establishing an online learning program to train this population in research methods specific to bladder cancer and to subsequently engage patients in various stages of bladder cancer research. METHODS: We created online learning modules that addressed scientific concepts related to bladder cancer, creating the patient empowerment through engagement in research (PEER) program. Bladder cancer patients and caregivers who completed the program were invited to participate in the annual BCAN Bladder Cancer Summit to develop research study concepts. We then facilitated the promoting implementation of patient engagement in research conference to identify methods of connecting patient research advocates with research teams and find ways to disseminate patient-centered outcomes research. RESULTS: After completing the online training, 2 cohorts of PEER trainees attended the 2017 (n = 19) and 2018 (n = 18) Bladder Cancer Summits. These research advocates contributed to the prioritization of bladder cancer research topics that appeared on the Patient Survey Network and developed 3 patient-centered research studies. BCAN research advocates participated in promoting implementation of patient engagement the following year (n = 57) and identified these priorities: (1) the need to expand the patient research advocate cohort, (2) the need to streamline links between patient research advocates and research teams, and (3) approaches for patient-centered dissemination of research results. CONCLUSIONS: The PEER program provides an exemplar for disease-specific research training for fostering patient engagement in research. This framework can be extrapolated to facilitate patient engagement in the research of other disease processes and malignancies.

Fatigue, symptom burden, and health-related quality of life in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome, aplastic anemia, and paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is distressing and affects quality of life (QoL) among patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), aplastic anemia (AA), and paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH). Limited data exist on the impact of fatigue, QoL, and related symptoms in these patients. OBJECTIVE: Prospectively assess fatigue (functional assessment of cancer therapy-anemia [FACT-An]); QoL (FACT-An subscales); pain (brief pain inventory); and depression, anxiety, and stress (depression anxiety stress scale-21) and strategies used to manage these symptoms in patients with MDS, AA, and PNH. METHODS: Surveys were administered via the AA and MDS International Foundation website and database from October 2014 through April 2015 in a cross-sectional study. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 303 patients, 145 (48%) had MDS, 84 (28%) had AA, and 74 (24%) had PNH; 31 (10%) had >1 diagnosis. The mean age was 57 years, 200 (66%) were female, and 195 (92%) were white. The mean fatigue scores were 25 (range 1-52) for the whole cohort, 28 for AA, 25 for MDS, and 24 for PNH (P = 0.117); these are all considered severe level. The mean QoL score was 68 (range 10-104) for the whole cohort, 67 for AA, 69 for MDS, and 67 for PNH (P = 0.821). The ranges for stress were normal; pain and depression, mild; and anxiety, moderate. The most common management strategies perceived as helpful for fatigue in the past month were preserving energy, physical activity, and naps. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with MDS, AA, and PNH report severe fatigue. The helpfulness of fatigue management strategies may impact patients' continued use; whether these strategies are beneficial and decrease fatigue levels needs more study.

Patient-centered prioritization of bladder cancer research.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered research requires the meaningful involvement of patients and caregivers throughout the research process. The objective of this study was to create a process for sustainable engagement for research prioritization within oncology. METHODS: From December 2014 to 2016, a network of engaged patients for research prioritization was created in partnership with the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network (BCAN): the BCAN Patient Survey Network (PSN). The PSN leveraged an online bladder cancer community with additional recruitment through print advertisements and social media campaigns. Prioritized research questions were developed through a modified Delphi process and were iterated through multidisciplinary working groups and a repeat survey. RESULTS: In year 1 of the PSN, 354 patients and caregivers responded to the research prioritization survey; the number of responses increased to 1034 in year 2. The majority of respondents had non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), and the mean time since diagnosis was 5 years. Stakeholder-identified questions for noninvasive, invasive, and metastatic disease were prioritized by the PSN. Free-text questions were sorted with thematic mapping. Several questions submitted by respondents were among the prioritized research questions. A final prioritized list of research questions was disseminated to various funding agencies, and a highly ranked NMIBC research question was included as a priority area in the 2017 Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute announcement of pragmatic trial funding. CONCLUSIONS: Patient engagement is needed to identify high-priority research questions in oncology. The BCAN PSN provides a successful example of an engagement infrastructure for annual research prioritization in bladder cancer. The creation of an engagement network sets the groundwork for additional phases of engagement, including design, conduct, and dissemination. Cancer 2018. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Collaborating to Move Research Forward: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Bladder Cancer Think Tank.

The 10th Annual Bladder Cancer Think Tank was hosted by the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network and brought together a multidisciplinary group of clinicians, researchers, representatives and Industry to advance bladder cancer research efforts. Think Tank expert panels, group discussions, and networking opportunities helped generate ideas and strengthen collaborations between researchers and physicians across disciplines and between institutions. Interactive panel discussions addressed a variety of timely issues: 1) data sharing, privacy and social media; 2) improving patient navigation through therapy; 3) promising developments in immunotherapy; 4) and moving bladder cancer research from bench to bedside. Lastly, early career researchers presented their bladder cancer studies and had opportunities to network with leading experts.