Second TURB, restaging TURB or repeat TURB in primary T1 non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: impact on prognosis?

PURPOSE: A re-transurethral resection of the bladder (re-TURB) is a well-established approach in managing non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) for various reasons: repeat-TURB is recommended for a macroscopically incomplete initial resection, restaging-TURB is required if the first resection was macroscopically complete but contained no detrusor muscle (DM) and second-TURB is advised for all completely resected T1-tumors with DM in the resection specimen. This study assessed the long-term outcomes after repeat-, second-, and restaging-TURB in T1-NMIBC patients. METHODS: Individual patient data with tumor characteristics of 1660 primary T1-patients (muscle-invasion at re-TURB omitted) diagnosed from 1990 to 2018 in 17 hospitals were analyzed. Time to recurrence, progression, death due to bladder cancer (BC), and all causes (OS) were visualized with cumulative incidence functions and analyzed by log-rank tests and multivariable Cox-regression models stratified by institution. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 45.3 (IQR 22.7-81.1) months. There were no differences in time to recurrence, progression, or OS between patients undergoing restaging (135 patients), second (644 patients), or repeat-TURB (84 patients), nor between patients who did or who did not undergo second or restaging-TURB. However, patients who underwent repeat-TURB had a shorter time to BC death compared to those who had second- or restaging-TURB (multivariable HR 3.58, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Prognosis did not significantly differ between patients who underwent restaging- or second-TURB. However, a worse prognosis in terms of death due to bladder cancer was found in patients who underwent repeat-TURB compared to second-TURB and restaging-TURB, highlighting the importance of separately evaluating different indications for re-TURB.

International Opinions on Grading of Urothelial Carcinoma: A Survey Among European Association of Urology and International Society of Urological Pathology Members.

Background: Grade of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is an important prognostic factor for progression. Currently, two World Health Organization (WHO) classification systems (WHO1973, categories: grade 1-3, and WHO2004 categories: papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential [PUNLMP], low-grade [LG], high-grade [HG] carcinoma) are used. Objective: To ask the European Association of Urology (EAU) and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) members regarding their current practice and preferences of grading systems. Design setting and participants: A web-based, anonymous questionnaire with ten questions on grading of NMIBC was created. The members of EAU and ISUP were invited to complete an online survey by the end of 2021. Thirteen experts had previously answered the same questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The submitted answers from 214 ISUP members, 191 EAU members, and 13 experts were analyzed. Results and limitations: Currently, 53% use only the WHO2004 system and 40% use both systems. According to most respondents, PUNLMP is a rare diagnosis with management similar to Ta-LG carcinoma. The majority (72%) would consider reverting back to WHO1973 if grading criteria were more detailed. Separate reporting of WHO1973-G3 within WHO2004-HG would influence clinical decisions for Ta and/or T1 tumors according the majority (55%). Most respondents preferred a two-tier (41%) or a three-tier (41%) grading system. The current WHO2004 grading system is supported by a minority (20%), whereas nearly half (48%) supported a hybrid three- or four-tier grading system composed of both WHO1973 and WHO2004. The survey results of the experts were comparable with ISUP and EAU respondents. Conclusions: Both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 grading system are still widely used. Even though opinions on the future of bladder cancer grading were strongly divided, there was limited support for WHO1973 and WHO2004 in their current formats, while the hybrid (three-tier) grading system with LG, HG-G2, and HG-G3 as categories could be considered the most promising alternative. Patient summary: Grading of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a matter of ongoing debate and lacks international consensus. We surveyed urologists and pathologists of European Association of Urology and International Society of Urological Pathology on their preferences regarding NMIBC grading to generate a multidisciplinary dialogue. Both the "old" World Health Organization (WHO) 1973 and the "new" WHO2004 grading schemes are still used widely. However, continuation of both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 system showed limited support, while a hybrid grading system composed of both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 classification system may be considered a promising alternative.

Mapping European Association of Urology Guideline Practice Across Europe: An Audit of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Use Before Prostate Cancer Surgery in 6598 Cases in 187 Hospitals Across 31 European Countries.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-practice gaps exist in urology. We previously surveyed European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for strong recommendations underpinned by high-certainty evidence that impact patient experience for which practice variations were suspected. The recommendation "Do not offer neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) before surgery for patients with prostate cancer" was prioritised for further investigation. ADT before surgery is neither clinically effective nor cost effective and has serious side effects. The first step in improving implementation problems is to understand their extent. A clear picture of practice regarding ADT before surgery across Europe is not available. OBJECTIVE: To assess current ADT use before prostate cancer surgery in Europe. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was an observational cross-sectional study. We retrospectively audited recent ADT practices in a multicentre international setting. We used nonprobability purposive sampling, aiming for breadth in terms of low- versus high-volume, academic, versus community and public versus private centres. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Our primary outcome was adherence to the ADT recommendation. Descriptive statistics and a multilevel model were used to investigate differences between countries across different factors (volume, centre type, and funding type). Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with low, intermediate, and high risk, and for those with locally advanced prostate cancer. We also collected reasons for nonadherence. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 6598 patients with prostate cancer from 187 hospitals in 31 countries from January 1, 2017 to May 1, 2020. Overall, nonadherence was 2%, (range 0-32%). Most of the variability was found in the high-risk subgroup, for which nonadherence was 4% (range 0-43%). Reasons for nonadherence included attempts to improve oncological outcomes or preoperative tumour parameters; attempts to control the cancer because of long waiting lists; and patient preference (changing one's mind from radiotherapy to surgery after neoadjuvant ADT had commenced or feeling that the side effects were intolerable). Although we purposively sampled for variety within countries (public/private, academic/community, high/low-volume), a selection bias toward centres with awareness of guidelines is possible, so adherence rates may be overestimated. CONCLUSIONS: EAU guidelines recommend against ADT use before prostate cancer surgery, yet some guideline-discordant ADT use remains at the cost of patient experience and an additional payer and provider burden. Strategies towards discontinuation of inappropriate preoperative ADT use should be pursued. PATIENT SUMMARY: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is sometimes used in men with prostate cancer who will not benefit from it. ADT causes side effects such as weight gain and emotional changes and increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and osteoporosis. Guidelines strongly recommend that men opting for surgery should not receive ADT, but it is unclear how well the guidance is followed. We asked urologists across Europe how patients in their institutions were treated over the past few years. Most do not use ADT before surgery, but this still happens in some places. More research is needed to help doctors to stop using ADT in patients who will not benefit from it.

Prognosis of Primary Papillary Ta Grade 3 Bladder Cancer in the Non-muscle-invasive Spectrum.

BACKGROUND: Ta grade 3 (G3) non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a relatively rare diagnosis with an ambiguous character owing to the presence of an aggressive G3 component together with the lower malignant potential of the Ta component. The European Association of Urology (EAU) NMIBC guidelines recently changed the risk stratification for Ta G3 from high risk to intermediate, high, or very high risk. However, prognostic studies on Ta G3 carcinomas are limited and inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic value of categorizing Ta G3 compared to Ta G2 and T1 G3 carcinomas. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual patient data for 5170 primary Ta-T1 bladder tumors from 17 hospitals were analyzed. Transurethral resection of the tumor was performed between 1990 and 2018. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Time to recurrence and time to progression were analyzed using cumulative incidence functions, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox-regression models with interaction terms stratified by institution. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Ta G3 represented 7.5% (387/5170) of Ta-T1 carcinomas of which 42% were classified as intermediate risk. Time to recurrence did not differ between Ta G3 and Ta G2 (p = 0.9) or T1 G3 (p = 0.4). Progression at 5 yr occurred for 3.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.7-4.8%) of Ta G2, 13% (95% CI 9.3-17%) of Ta G3, and 20% (95% CI 17-23%) of T1 G3 carcinomas. Time to progression for Ta G3 was shorter than for Ta G2 (p < 0.001) and longer than for T1 G3 (p = 0.002). Patients with Ta G3 NMIBC with concomitant carcinoma in situ (CIS) had worse prognosis and a similar time to progression as for patients with T1 G3 NMIBC with CIS (p = 0.5). Multivariable analyses for recurrence and progression showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis of Ta G3 tumors in terms of progression appears to be in between that of Ta G2 and T1 G3. However, patients with Ta G3 NMIBC with concomitant CIS have worse prognosis that is comparable to that of T1 G3 with CIS. Our results support the recent EAU NMIBC guideline changes for more refined risk stratification of Ta G3 tumors because many of these patients have better prognosis than previously thought. PATIENT SUMMARY: We used data from 17 centers in Europe and Canada to assess the prognosis for patients with stage Ta grade 3 (G3) non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Time to cancer progression for Ta G3 cancer differed from both Ta G2 and T1 G3 tumors. Our results support the recent change in the European Association of Urology guidelines for more refined risk stratification of Ta G3 NMIBC because many patients with this tumor have better prognosis than previously thought.

T1G1 Bladder Cancer: Prognosis for this Rare Pathological Diagnosis Within the Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Spectrum.

BACKGROUND: The pathological existence and clinical consequence of stage T1 grade 1 (T1G1) bladder cancer are the subject of debate. Even though the diagnosis of T1G1 is controversial, several reports have consistently found a prevalence of 2-6% G1 in their T1 series. However, it remains unclear if T1G1 carcinomas have added value as a separate category to predict prognosis within the non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) spectrum. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic value of T1G1 carcinomas compared to TaG1 and T1G2 carcinomas within the NMIBC spectrum. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual patient data for 5170 primary Ta and T1 bladder tumors from 17 hospitals in Europe and Canada were analyzed. Transurethral resection (TUR) was performed between 1990 and 2018. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Time to recurrence and progression were analyzed using cumulative incidence functions, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression models stratified by institution. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: T1G1 represented 1.9% (99/5170) of all carcinomas and 5.3% (99/1859) of T1 carcinomas. According to primary TUR dates, the proportion of T1G1 varied between 0.9% and 3.5% per year, with similar percentages in the early and later calendar years. We found no difference in time to recurrence between T1G1 and TaG1 (p = 0.91) or between T1G1 and T1G2 (p = 0.30). Time to progression significantly differed between TaG1 and T1G1 (p < 0.001) but not between T1G1 and T1G2 (p = 0.30). Multivariable analyses for recurrence and progression showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The relative prevalence of T1G1 diagnosis was low and remained constant over the past three decades. Time to recurrence of T1G1 NMIBC was comparable to that for other stage/grade NMIBC combinations. Time to progression of T1G1 NMIBC was comparable to that for T1G2 but not for TaG1, suggesting that treatment and surveillance of T1G1 carcinomas should be more like the approaches for T1G2 NMIBC in accordance with the intermediate and/or high risk categories of the European Association of Urology NMIBC guidelines. PATIENT SUMMARY: Although rare, stage T1 grade 1 (T1G1) bladder cancer is still diagnosed in daily clinical practice. Using individual patient data from 17 centers in Europe and Canada, we found that time to progression of T1G1 cancer was comparable to that for T1G2 but not TaG1 cancer. Therefore, our results suggest that primary T1G1 bladder cancers should be managed with more aggressive treatment and more frequent follow-up than for low-risk bladder cancer.

Systematic Review of Active Surveillance for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer to Develop Recommendations Regarding Inclusion of Intermediate-risk Disease, Biopsy Characteristics at Inclusion and Monitoring, and Surveillance Repeat Biopsy Strategy.

CONTEXT: There is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate criteria for recruitment, monitoring, and reclassification in active surveillance (AS) protocols for localised prostate cancer (PCa). OBJECTIVE: To perform a qualitative systematic review (SR) to issue recommendations regarding inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, biopsy characteristics at inclusion and monitoring, and repeat biopsy strategy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A protocol-driven, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-adhering SR incorporating AS protocols published from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed. The main outcomes were criteria for inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, monitoring, reclassification, and repeat biopsy strategies (per protocol and/or triggered). Clinical effectiveness data were not assessed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of the 17 011 articles identified, 333 studies incorporating 375 AS protocols, recruiting 264 852 patients, were included. Only a minority of protocols included the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for recruitment (n = 17), follow-up (n = 47), and reclassification (n = 26). More than 50% of protocols included patients with intermediate or high-risk disease, whilst 44.1% of protocols excluded low-risk patients with more than three positive cores, and 39% of protocols excluded patients with core involvement (CI) >50% per core. Of the protocols, ≥80% mandated a confirmatory transrectal ultrasound biopsy; 72% (n = 189) of protocols mandated per-protocol repeat biopsies, with 20% performing this annually and 25% every 2 yr. Only 27 protocols (10.3%) mandated triggered biopsies, with 74% of these protocols defining progression or changes on MRI as triggers for repeat biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: For AS protocols in which the use of MRI is not mandatory or absent, we recommend the following: (1) AS can be considered in patients with low-volume International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 (three or fewer positive cores and cancer involvement ≤50% CI per core) or another single element of intermediate-risk disease, and patients with ISUP 3 should be excluded; (2) per-protocol confirmatory prostate biopsies should be performed within 2 yr, and per-protocol surveillance repeat biopsies should be performed at least once every 3 yr for the first 10 yr; and (3) for patients with low-volume, low-risk disease at recruitment, if repeat systematic biopsies reveal more than three positive cores or maximum CI >50% per core, they should be monitored closely for evidence of adverse features (eg, upgrading); patients with ISUP 2 disease with increased core positivity and/or CI to similar thresholds should be reclassified. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the literature to issue new recommendations on active surveillance (AS) for managing localised prostate cancer. The recommendations include setting criteria for including men with more aggressive disease (intermediate-risk disease), setting thresholds for close monitoring of men with low-risk but more extensive disease, and determining when to perform repeat biopsies (within 2 yr and 3 yearly thereafter).

Improving Guideline Adherence in Urology.

CONTEXT: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) distil an evidence base into recommendations. CPG adherence is associated with better patient outcomes. However, preparation and dissemination of CPGs are a costly task involving multiple skilled personnel. Furthermore, dissemination alone does not ensure CPG adherence. Reasons for nonadherence are often complex, but understanding practice variations and reasons for nonadherence is key to improving CPG adherence and harmonising clinically appropriate and cost-effective care. OBJECTIVE: To overview approaches to improving guideline adherence, to provide urology-specific examples of knowledge-practice gaps, and to highlight potential solutions informed by implementation science. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Three common approaches to implementation science (the Knowledge-To-Action framework, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and the Behaviour Change Wheel), are summarised. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Three implementation problems in urology are illustrated: underuse of single instillation of intravesical chemotherapy in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, overuse of androgen deprivation therapy in localised prostate cancer, and guideline-discordant imaging in prostate cancer. Research using implementation science approaches to address these implementation problems is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Urologists, patients, health care providers, funders, and other key stakeholders must commit to reliably capturing and reporting data on patient outcomes, practice variations, guideline adherence, and the impact of adherence on outcomes. Leverage of implementation science frameworks is a sound next step towards improving guideline adherence and the associated benefits of evidence-based care. PATIENT SUMMARY: Clinical practice guideline documents are created by expert panels. These documents provide overviews of the evidence for the tests and treatments used in patient care. They also provide recommendations and it is expected that in most circumstances clinicians will follow these recommendations. Sometimes, health care professionals cannot or do not follow these recommendations and it is not always clear why. In this review article we look at some examples of research approaches to addressing this problem of nonadherence and we provide some examples specific to urology.

European Association of Urology (EAU) Prognostic Factor Risk Groups for Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer (NMIBC) Incorporating the WHO 2004/2016 and WHO 1973 Classification Systems for Grade: An Update from the EAU NMIBC Guidelines Panel.

BACKGROUND: The European Association of Urology (EAU) prognostic factor risk groups for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) are used to provide recommendations for patient treatment after transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT). They do not, however, take into account the widely used World Health Organization (WHO) 2004/2016 grading classification and are based on patients treated in the 1980s. OBJECTIVE: To update EAU prognostic factor risk groups using the WHO 1973 and 2004/2016 grading classifications and identify patients with the lowest and highest probabilities of progression. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual patient data for primary NMIBC patients were collected from the institutions of the members of the EAU NMIBC guidelines panel. INTERVENTION: Patients underwent TURBT followed by intravesical instillations at the physician's discretion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models were fitted to the primary endpoint, the time to progression to muscle-invasive disease or distant metastases. Patients were divided into four risk groups: low-, intermediate-, high-, and a new, very high-risk group. The probabilities of progression were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 3401 patients treated with TURBT ± intravesical chemotherapy were included. From the multivariable analyses, tumor stage, WHO 1973/2004-2016 grade, concomitant carcinoma in situ, number of tumors, tumor size, and age were used to form four risk groups for which the probability of progression at 5 yr varied from <1% to >40%. Limitations include the retrospective collection of data and the lack of central pathology review. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides updated EAU prognostic factor risk groups that can be used to inform patient treatment and follow-up. Incorporating the WHO 2004/2016 and 1973 grading classifications, a new, very high-risk group has been identified for which urologists should be prompt to assess and adapt their therapeutic strategy when necessary. PATIENT SUMMARY: The newly updated European Association of Urology prognostic factor risk groups for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer provide an improved basis for recommending a patient's treatment and follow-up schedule.

IMAGINE-IMpact Assessment of Guidelines Implementation and Education: The Next Frontier for Harmonising Urological Practice Across Europe by Improving Adherence to Guidelines.

Adherence to national and international clinical practice guidelines is suboptimal throughout Europe. The European Association of Urology Guidelines Office project "IMAGINE" (IMpact Assessment of Guidelines Implementation and Education) has been developed to measure baseline adherence to urological guideline recommendations across Europe and to identify issues that drive nonadherence.

European Association of Urology Guidelines Office: How We Ensure Transparent Conflict of Interest Disclosure and Management.

Conflicts of interest (COIs) can potentially introduce a risk of bias into the assessment of evidence and the formulation of recommendations for guidelines. It is essential that a systematic process for the disclosure and management of COIs is adopted to minimise potential bias in the guideline development process.

Male Sexual and Reproductive Health-Does the Urologist Have a Role in Addressing Gender Inequality in Life Expectancy?

Despite considerable public health initiatives in the past century, there remains a significant gender inequality in life expectancy. The Global Burden of Diseases study has highlighted that the life expectancy for men is 70.5years, compared with 75.6years for women. This discrepancy in mortality appears to be related to a disproportionately higher number of preventable and premature male deaths. Whilst there has been an increased focus on men's health, as evidenced by the establishment of men's health charities and governmental legislation promoting equality, a recent World Health Organization report has highlighted that there is still a prevailing misconception that the higher rate of premature mortality amongst men is a natural phenomenon. We explore the association of male sexual and reproductive health-related diseases and the potential role of a urologist in addressing gender inequality in life expectancy. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we discuss the causes for the gender gap in life expectancy and highlight that men continue to have a higher rate of premature death than women, which is associated with diseases of the male reproductive system. Furthermore, this not only appears to be related to a number of metabolic and lifestyle factors, but may also be the result of the increased risk of cancer in men with sexual and reproductive health-related diseases.

Papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential (PUN-LMP): Still a meaningful histo-pathological grade category for Ta, noninvasive bladder tumors in 2019?

BACKGROUND: Papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential (PUN-LMP) was introduced as a noninvasive, noncancerous lesion and a separate grade category in 1998. Subsequently, PUN-LMP was reconfirmed by World Health Organization (WHO) 2004 and WHO 2016 classifications for urothelial bladder tumors. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the proportion of PUN-LMP diagnosis over time and to determine its prognostic value compared to Ta-LG (low-grade) and Ta-HG (high-grade) carcinomas. To assess the intraobserver variability of an experienced uropathologist assigning (WHO) 2004/2016 grades at 2 time points. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Individual patient data of 3,311 primary Ta bladder tumors from 17 hospitals in Europe and Canada were available. Transurethral resection of the tumor was performed between 1990 and 2018. Time to recurrence and progression were analyzed with cumulative incidence functions, log-rank tests and multivariable Cox-regression stratified by institution. Intraobserver variability was assessed by examining the same 314 transurethral resection of the tumorslides twice, in 2004 and again in 2018. RESULTS: PUN-LMP represented 3.8% (127/3,311) of Ta tumors. The same pathologist found 71/314 (22.6%) PUN-LMPs in 2004 and only 20/314 (6.4%) in 2018. Overall, the proportion of PUN-LMP diagnosis substantially decreased over time from 31.3% (1990-2000) to 3.2% (2000-2010) and to 1.1% (2010-2018). We found no difference in time to recurrence between the three WHO 2004/2016 Ta-grade categories (log-rank, P = 0.381), nor for LG vs. PUN-LMP (log-rank, P = 0.238). Time to progression was different for all grade categories (log-rank, P < 0.001), but not between LG and PUN-LMP (log-rank, P = 0.096). Multivariable analyses on recurrence and progression showed similar results for all 3 grade categories and for LG vs. PUN-LMP. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of PUN-LMP has decreased to very low levels in the last decade. Contrary to its reconfirmation in the WHO 2016 classification, our results do not support the continued use of PUN-LMP as a separate grade category in Ta tumors because of the similar prognosis for PUN-LMP and Ta-LG carcinomas.

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel Consensus Statements for Deferred Treatment with Curative Intent for Localised Prostate Cancer from an International Collaborative Study (DETECTIVE Study).

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty in deferred active treatment (DAT) programmes, regarding patient selection, follow-up and monitoring, reclassification, and which outcome measures should be prioritised. OBJECTIVE: To develop consensus statements for all domains of DAT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A protocol-driven, three phase study was undertaken by the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Association of Urology Section of Urological Research (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel in conjunction with partner organisations, including the following: (1) a systematic review to describe heterogeneity across all domains; (2) a two-round Delphi survey involving a large, international panel of stakeholders, including healthcare practitioners (HCPs) and patients; and (3) a consensus group meeting attended by stakeholder group representatives. Robust methods regarding what constituted the consensus were strictly followed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 109 HCPs and 16 patients completed both survey rounds. Of 129 statements in the survey, consensus was achieved in 66 (51%); the rest of the statements were discussed and voted on in the consensus meeting by 32 HCPs and three patients, where consensus was achieved in additional 27 statements (43%). Overall, 93 statements (72%) achieved consensus in the project. Some uncertainties remained regarding clinically important thresholds for disease extent on biopsy in low-risk disease, and the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in determining disease stage and aggressiveness as a criterion for inclusion and exclusion. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus statements and the findings are expected to guide and inform routine clinical practice and research, until higher levels of evidence emerge through prospective comparative studies and clinical trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: We undertook a project aimed at standardising the elements of practice in active surveillance programmes for early localised prostate cancer because currently there is great variation and uncertainty regarding how best to conduct them. The project involved large numbers of healthcare practitioners and patients using a survey and face-to-face meeting, in order to achieve agreement (ie, consensus) regarding best practice, which will provide guidance to clinicians and researchers.

Changing Current Practice in Urology: Improving Guideline Development and Implementation Through Stakeholder Engagement.

Effective stakeholder integration for guideline development should improve outcomes and adherence to clinical practice guidelines.

Conflict of Evidence: Resolving Discrepancies When Findings from Randomized Controlled Trials and Meta-analyses Disagree.

CONTEXT: Clinicians and treatment guideline developers are faced with a dilemma when the results of a new, large, well-conducted randomized controlled trial (RCT) are in direct conflict with the results of a previous systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA). OBJECTIVE: To explore and discuss possible reasons for disagreement in results from SRs/MAs and RCTs and to provide guidance to clinicians and guideline developers for making well-informed treatment decisions and recommendations in the face of conflicting data. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The advantages and limitations of RCTs and SRs/MAs are reviewed. Two practical examples that have a direct bearing on European Association of Urology guidelines on treatment recommendations are discussed in detail to illustrate the points to be considered when conflicts exist between the results of large RCTs and SRs/MAs. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: RCTs are the gold standard for providing evidence of the effectiveness of interventions. However, concerns regarding the internal and external validity of an RCT may limit its applicability to clinical practice. SRs/MAs synthesize all evidence related to a given research question, but two urologic examples show that the validity of the results depends on the quality of the individual studies, the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the studies, and publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Although SRs/MAs can provide a higher level of evidence than RCTs, the quality of the evidence from both RCTs and SRs/MAs should be investigated when their results conflict to determine which source provides the better evidence. Guideline developers should have a well-defined and robust process to assess the evidence from MAs and RCTs when such conflicts exist. PATIENT SUMMARY: We discuss the advantages and limitations of using data from randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews/meta-analyses in informing clinical practice when there are conflicting results. We provide guidance on how such conflicts should be dealt with by guideline organizations.