Level 1 evidence supports neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by a radical cystectomy (RC) for treating muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).1 Given its substantial perioperative morbidity, bladder preservation therapy (BPT) is an alternative treatment option for individuals who wish to avoid or are not able to undergo RC.2 Given the absence of prospective randomized clinical trials, well-designed observational cohort studies currently offer the best comparative effectiveness evidence to evaluate these treatment options.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Cahn DB, Handorf EA, Smaldone MC. Bladder Extirpation vs Preservation: The Treatment Debate. JAMA Surg. 2018;153(10):889–890. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2018.1674
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: