Feasibility of Pre- and Postoperative Gemcitabine-plus-Cisplatin Systemic Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma in Kidney Transplant Patients

Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma with or without Kidney Transplantation

Background: The incidence of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is uniquely high in kidney transplant (KT) recipients in Taiwan. The evidence of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in UTUC is contradictory. We have sought to determine whether AC is associated with potential benefits related to locally advanced UTUC after KT. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 134 patients with locally advanced UTUC (at least stage T2) and patients who were administrated AC after unilateral or bilateral nephroureterectomy with bladder cuff excision. Of these 134 patients, 57 patients fulfilled our inclusion criteria. We used 23 KT and 34 non-KT locally advanced UTUC patients for comparison. Results: The mean follow-up time was 52.35 ± 34.56 and 64.71 ± 42.29 months for the KT and non-KT groups, respectively. The five-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 45.7% vs. 70.2% and 62.8% vs. 77.6%, for the KT and non-KT groups. The Kaplan-Meier curve and the log rank test revealed significant differences in the DFS and OS rates between the two groups, p = 0.015 and 0.036. The influence of chemotherapy on graft kidney function was mild. Only three in the KT group and two in the non-KT group developed > grade 2 nephrotoxicity. Conclusions: Our study suggested that KT patients with locally advanced UTUC who had been administered AC after surgery presented worse OS and DFS than non-KT patients. KT patients tolerated the AC course well, and their nephrotoxicity levels were mild and acceptable.

Chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy: Which drugs can be safely used in the solid organ transplant recipients?

In solid organ transplant recipients, cancer is associated with worse prognosis than in the general population. Among the causes of increased cancer‐associated mortality, are the limitations in selecting the optimal anticancer regimen in solid organ transplant recipients, because of the associated risks of graft toxicity and rejection, drug‐to‐drug interactions, reduced kidney or liver function, and patient frailty and comorbid conditions. The advent of immunotherapy has generated further challenges, mainly because checkpoint inhibitors increase the risk of rejection, which may have life‐threatening consequences in recipients of life‐saving organs. In general, there are no safe or unsafe anticancer drugs. Rather, the optimal choice of the anticancer regimen results from a careful risk/benefit assessment, from the awareness of potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug‐to‐drug interactions, and of the risk of drug overexposure in patients with kidney or liver dysfunction. In this review, we summarize general principles that may help the oncologists and transplant physicians in the multidisciplinary management of recipients of solid organ transplantation with cancer who are candidates for chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or immunotherapy.

Management of the kidney transplant patient with Cancer: Report from a Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference

INTRODUCTION

Cancer is the second most common cause of mortality and morbidity in Kidney Transplant Recipients (KTRs). Immunosuppression can influence the efficacy of cancer treatment and modification of the immunosuppressive regimen may restore anti-neoplastic immune responses improving oncologic prognosis. However, patients and transplant physicians are usually reluctant to modify immunosuppression, fearing rejection and potential graft loss. Due to the lack of extensive and recognised data supporting how to manage the immunosuppressive therapy in KTRs, in the context of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and loco-regional treatments, a Consensus Conference was organised under the auspices of the European Society of Organ Transplantation and the Italian Society of Organ Transplantation. The conference involved a multidisciplinary group of transplant experts in the field across Europe.

METHODS

The overall process included a) the formulation of 12 specific questions based on the PICO methodology, b) systematic literature review and summary for experts for each question, c) a two-day conference celebration and the collection of experts' agreements. The conference was articulated in three sessions: "Immunosuppressive therapy and immunotherapy", "Systemic therapy", "Integrated Therapy", while the final experts' agreement was collected with a televoting procedure and defined according to the majority criterion.

RESULTS

Twenty-six European experts attended the conference and expressed their vote. A total of 14 statements were finally elaborated and voted. Strong agreement was found for ten statements, moderate agreement for two, moderate disagreement for one and uncertainty for the last one.

CONCLUSIONS

The consensus statements provide guidance to transplant physicians caring for kidney transplant recipients with cancer and indicate key aspects that need to be addressed by future clinical research.

Risk factors, management, and survival of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Kidney transplantation is associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer; however guidelines have not been established on the management of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review using PubMed was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement to identify studies concerning the prevalence and survival of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation. The risk factors and management of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation were also reviewed and discussed.

RESULTS

A total of 41 studies, published between 1996 and 2018, reporting primary data on bladder cancer after kidney transplantation were identified. Marked heterogeneity in bladder cancer prevalence, time to diagnosis, non-muscle invasive/muscle-invasive bladder cancer prevalence, and survival was noted. Four studies, published between 2003 and 2017, reporting primary data on bladder cancer treated with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) after kidney transplantation were identified. Disease-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were similar between BCG studies (75-100%).

CONCLUSIONS

Carcinogen exposure that led to ESRD, BKV, HPV, immunosuppressive agents, and the immunosuppressed state likely contribute to the increased risk of bladder cancer after renal transplantation. Non-muscle invasive disease should be treated with transurethral resection. BCG can be safely used in transplant recipients and likely improves the disease course. Muscle-invasive disease should be treated with radical cystectomy, with special consideration to the dissection and urinary diversion choice. Chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors can be safely used in regionally advanced bladder cancer with potential benefit. mTOR inhibitors may reduce the risk of developing bladder cancer, and immunosuppression medications should be reduced if malignancy develops.

Risk factors, management, and survival of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Kidney transplantation is associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer; however guidelines have not been established on the management of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review using PubMed was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement to identify studies concerning the prevalence and survival of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation. The risk factors and management of bladder cancer after kidney transplantation were also reviewed and discussed.

RESULTS

A total of 41 studies, published between 1996 and 2018, reporting primary data on bladder cancer after kidney transplantation were identified. Marked heterogeneity in bladder cancer prevalence, time to diagnosis, non-muscle invasive/muscle-invasive bladder cancer prevalence, and survival was noted. Four studies, published between 2003 and 2017, reporting primary data on bladder cancer treated with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) after kidney transplantation were identified. Disease-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were similar between BCG studies (75-100%).

CONCLUSIONS

Carcinogen exposure that led to ESRD, BKV, HPV, immunosuppressive agents, and the immunosuppressed state likely contribute to the increased risk of bladder cancer after renal transplantation. Non-muscle invasive disease should be treated with transurethral resection. BCG can be safely used in transplant recipients and likely improves the disease course. Muscle-invasive disease should be treated with radical cystectomy, with special consideration to the dissection and urinary diversion choice. Chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors can be safely used in regionally advanced bladder cancer with potential benefit. mTOR inhibitors may reduce the risk of developing bladder cancer, and immunosuppression medications should be reduced if malignancy develops.

[Urological follow-up and development of cancer after renal transplantation]

BACKGROUND

The number of renal transplant recipients is rising, as well as graft and recipient survival. The mainstay of urological follow-up is to ensure urine transport and voiding function; also, the diagnosis and treatment of urological malignancies following renal transplantats is growing in importance. As urological malignancies are one of the three most common tumors following renal transplantation (RT), meticulous and regular urological evaluation is a central part of follow-up care after RT.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Urological evaluation following RT must ensure correct urine transport and voiding function. Transplant ureter strictures, relevant ureteral reflux and voiding dysfuntion (e.g., neurologic dysfunction, benign prostate hypeplasia) must be excluded or treated. Urinary tract infection (UTI), which can be life threatening in the immunosuppressed transplant recipient, must be diagnosed and treated consequently and for an adequate period of time. Prophylaxis of UTIs is indicated in patients with recurrent symptomatic UTI as well as in the initial 6 months following renal transplantation. Asymptomatic bacteriuria must not necessarily be treated. The incidence of urological malignancies like renal cell carcinoma, urothelial cancer of the bladder, and penile carcinoma is increased following RT, while the incidence of prostate and testis cancer is the same as in the nontransplant population. Surgical and nonsurgical treatment options do not differ from the normal population. Adaptation, cessation, or switching of the immunosuppressive regimen in case of urologic malignancy must be decided on the individual recipient basis.