Research and reports in urology · 2026
Sequential Intravesical Gemcitabine and Docetaxel for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Narrative Review Across Risk Groups.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hemmati Ghavshough Mahdi, Fu Melinda Z, Islam Raeesa, Patel Disha, Ghodoussipour Saum, Packiam Vignesh T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) accounts for the majority of newly diagnosed bladder cancer cases and is characterized by high rates of recurrence and progression. Intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) remains the standard of care for high-risk disease; however, treatment intolerance, failure, and global supply shortages have prompted investigation of alternative intravesical therapies.
OBJECTIVE: To summarize and critically appraise the existing clinical evidence evaluating sequential intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel (Gem/Doce) in NMIBC, across different clinical contexts.
METHODS: We performed a narrative review of published clinical studies assessing sequential intravesical Gem/Doce in patients with BCG-unresponsive, BCG-exposed, and selected treatment-naïve NMIBC. Reported oncologic outcomes, including recurrence-free survival, progression, cystectomy rates, and treatment-related adverse events, were reviewed. Emerging exploratory approaches, including biomarker-based risk stratification, were also described.
RESULTS: Across multiple retrospective and prospective studies, Gem/Doce has demonstrates favorable recurrence-free survival, and acceptable safety profiles, particularly in patients with BCG-unresponsive or previously treated high-risk NMIBC. Reported rates of progression and cystectomy are generally low, and treatment discontinuation due to toxicity is uncommon. Exploratory studies have evaluated AI-assisted histologic biomarkers as potential tools for risk stratification and hypothesis-generating treatment selection; however, these approaches remain investigational and require prospective validation.
CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that sequential intravesical Gem/Doce is a well-tolerated bladder-sparing option with encouraging oncologic outcomes, particularly in patients with recurrent or BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. While early data have explored its use in treatment-naïve settings, definitive conclusions regarding its role as first-line therapy require validation in prospective randomized trials.
OBJECTIVE: To summarize and critically appraise the existing clinical evidence evaluating sequential intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel (Gem/Doce) in NMIBC, across different clinical contexts.
METHODS: We performed a narrative review of published clinical studies assessing sequential intravesical Gem/Doce in patients with BCG-unresponsive, BCG-exposed, and selected treatment-naïve NMIBC. Reported oncologic outcomes, including recurrence-free survival, progression, cystectomy rates, and treatment-related adverse events, were reviewed. Emerging exploratory approaches, including biomarker-based risk stratification, were also described.
RESULTS: Across multiple retrospective and prospective studies, Gem/Doce has demonstrates favorable recurrence-free survival, and acceptable safety profiles, particularly in patients with BCG-unresponsive or previously treated high-risk NMIBC. Reported rates of progression and cystectomy are generally low, and treatment discontinuation due to toxicity is uncommon. Exploratory studies have evaluated AI-assisted histologic biomarkers as potential tools for risk stratification and hypothesis-generating treatment selection; however, these approaches remain investigational and require prospective validation.
CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that sequential intravesical Gem/Doce is a well-tolerated bladder-sparing option with encouraging oncologic outcomes, particularly in patients with recurrent or BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. While early data have explored its use in treatment-naïve settings, definitive conclusions regarding its role as first-line therapy require validation in prospective randomized trials.