Molecular Subtypes as a Basis for Stratified Use of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer-A Narrative Review
- PMID: 35406463
- PMCID: PMC8996989
- DOI: 10.3390/cancers14071692
Molecular Subtypes as a Basis for Stratified Use of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer-A Narrative Review
Abstract
There are no established biomarkers to guide patient selection for neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Recent studies suggest that molecular subtype classification holds promise for predicting chemotherapy response and/or survival benefit in this setting. Here, we summarize and discuss the scientific literature examining transcriptomic or panel-based molecular subtyping applied to neoadjuvant chemotherapy-treated patient cohorts. We find that there is not sufficient evidence to conclude that the basal subtype of muscle-invasive bladder cancer responds well to chemotherapy, since only a minority of studies support this conclusion. More evidence indicates that luminal-like subtypes may have the most improved outcomes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. There are also conflicting data concerning the association between biopsy stromal content and response. Subtypes indicative of high stromal infiltration responded well in some studies and poorly in others. Uncertainties when interpreting the current literature include a lack of reporting both response and survival outcomes and the inherent risk of bias in retrospective study designs. Taken together, available studies suggest a role for molecular subtyping in stratifying patients for receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The precise classification system that best captures such a predictive effect, and the exact subtypes for which other treatment options are more beneficial remains to be established, preferably in prospective studies.
Keywords: basal; biomarker; bladder cancer; chemotherapy; cisplatin; luminal; molecular subtypes; neoadjuvant; response; urothelial carcinoma.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funding sources had no role in the study design, data analyses, interpretation of the results, or writing of the manuscript.
References
-
- Hermans T.J.N., Voskuilen C.S., van der Heijden M.S., Schmitz-Dräger B.J., Kassouf W., Seiler R., Kamat A.M., Grivas P., Kiltie A.E., Black P.C., et al. Neoadjuvant treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: The past, the present, and the future. Urol. Oncol. 2018;36:413–422. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.10.014. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Rose T.L., Harrison M.R., Deal A.M., Ramalingam S., Whang Y.E., Brower B., Dunn M., Osterman C.K., Heiling H.M., Bjurlin M.A., et al. Phase II Study of Gemcitabine and Split-Dose Cisplatin Plus Pembrolizumab as Neoadjuvant Therapy before Radical Cystectomy in Patients with Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2021;39:3140–3148. doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.01003. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Funt S.A., Lattanzi M., Whiting K., Al-Ahmadie H., Quinlan C., Teo M.Y., Lee C.H., Aggen D., Zimmerman D., McHugh D., et al. Neoadjuvant Atezolizumab with Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Patients with Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Multicenter, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2022:JCO2101485. doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.01485. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources