Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2017 Nov;120(5):639-650.
doi: 10.1111/bju.13900. Epub 2017 May 29.

Clinical and patient-reported outcomes of SPARE - a randomised feasibility study of selective bladder preservation versus radical cystectomy

Robert A Huddart  1   2 , Alison Birtle  3 , Lauren Maynard  1 , Mark Beresford  4 , Jane Blazeby  5 , Jenny Donovan  5 , John D Kelly  6 , Tony Kirkbank  7 , Duncan B McLaren  8 , Graham Mead  9 , Clare Moynihan  1 , Raj Persad  10 , Christopher Scrase  11 , Rebecca Lewis  1 , Emma Hall  1
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Clinical and patient-reported outcomes of SPARE - a randomised feasibility study of selective bladder preservation versus radical cystectomy

Robert A Huddart et al. BJU Int. 2017 Nov.

Abstract

Objectives: To test the feasibility of a randomised trial in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) and compare outcomes in patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy (RC) or selective bladder preservation (SBP), where definitive treatment [RC or radiotherapy (RT)] is determined by response to chemotherapy.

Patients and methods: SPARE is a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing RC and SBP in patients with MIBC staged T2-3 N0 M0, fit for both treatment strategies and receiving three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were randomised between RC and SBP before a cystoscopy after cycle three of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with ≤T1 residual tumour received a fourth cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in both groups, followed by radical RT in the SBP group and RC in in the RC group; non-responders in both groups proceeded immediately to RC following cycle three. Feasibility study primary endpoints were accrual rate and compliance with assigned treatment strategy. The phase III trial was designed to demonstrate non-inferiority of SBP in terms of overall survival (OS) in patients whose tumours responded to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included patient-reported quality of life, clinician assessed toxicity, loco-regional recurrence-free survival, and rate of salvage RC after SBP.

Results: Trial recruitment was challenging and below the predefined target with 45 patients recruited in 30 months (25 RC; 20 SBP). Non-compliance with assigned treatment strategy was frequent, six of the 25 patients (24%) randomised to RC received RT. Long-term bladder preservation rate was 11/15 (73%) in those who received RT per protocol. OS survival was not significantly different between groups.

Conclusions: Randomising patients with MIBC between RC and SBP based on response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not feasible in the UK health system. Strong clinician and patient preferences for treatments impacted willingness to undergo randomisation and acceptance of treatment allocation. Due to the few participants, firm conclusions about disease and toxicity outcomes cannot be drawn.

Keywords: #BladderCancer; #blcsm; muscle-invasive bladder cancer; radical cystectomy; radiotherapy; randomised controlled trial; selective bladder preservation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial schema.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Patient flow through trial.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a) Time to first CTCAE grade 3–4 toxicity by definitive treatment received and (b) when excluding erectile dysfunction.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Time‐to‐event endpoints. Presented by allocated treatment for the population of patients who responded to chemotherapy. In all cases, patients with a second primary without a prior event were censored at the date of second primary and patients without an event were censored at the date last seen. Comparisons between groups were made using the log‐rank test.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Mean change from baseline in EORTC QLQ‐C30 subscales.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Mean change from baseline in EORTC QLQ‐BLM30 subscales.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

  • Should we care more about SPARE?
    Lee EK, Kamat AM. Lee EK, et al. BJU Int. 2017 Nov;120(5):605-606. doi: 10.1111/bju.13953. BJU Int. 2017. PMID: 29035018 No abstract available.

References

    1. Cookson MS. The surgical management of muscle invasive bladder cancer: a contemporary review. Semin Radiat Oncol 2005; 15: 10–8 - PubMed
    1. Hautmann RE, de Petriconi R, Gottfried HW, Kleinschmidt K, Mattes R, Paiss T. The ileal neobladder: complications and functional results in 363 patients after 11 years of followup. J Urol 1999; 161: 422–8 - PubMed
    1. Fosså SD, Waehre H, Aass N, Jacobsen AB, Olsen DR, Ous S. Bladder cancer definitive radiation therapy of muscle‐lnvasive bladder cancer – a retrospective analysis of 317 patients. Cancer 1993; 72: 3036–43 - PubMed
    1. Shipley WU, Zietman AL, Kaufman DS, Coen JJ, Sandler HM. Selective bladder preservation by trimodality therapy for patients with muscularis propria‐invasive bladder cancer and who are cystectomy candidates – the Massachusetts General Hospital and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group experiences. Semin Radiat Oncol 2005; 15: 36–41 - PubMed
    1. Ramani VA, Maddineni SB, Grey BR, Clarke NW. Differential complication rates following radical cystectomy in the irradiated and nonirradiated pelvis. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 1058–63 - PubMed

Publication types