Conductive hyperthermic chemotherapy versus electromotive drug administration of mitomycin C as intravesical adjuvant treatment of patients with intermediate or high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer

BackgroundDevices that increase the penetration of intravesical chemotherapeutic agents have been developed as alternatives to the use of bacillus Calmette–Guérin, in short supply at a time of increasing global incidence of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC).We performed a prospective observational study to compare 2 of these devices in the treatment of patients with high- and intermediate-risk NMIBC. The primary endpoint was the recurrence-free rate. Secondary endpoints were the rate of progression and adverse events.MethodsAfter undergoing transurethral bladder resection, 98 patients were selected to receive 1 of 2 treatments: hyperthermic intravesical chemotherapy (HIVEC) treatment with 40 mg of mitomycin C (MMC) using Combat BRS System V2.0 at 43 ± 0.5°C and 200 ml/min for 60 minutes (56 patients) or electromotive drug administration (EMDA) with 40 mg of MMC at 20 mA for 30 minutes (42 patients). The treatment schemes were similar: 6 weekly instillations as induction and 6-monthly instillations as maintenance. The recurrence rates were evaluated at 6 and 12 months and the progression rates at 12 months.ResultsThe recurrence-free rate at 12 months was 91,1% in the HIVEC group and 88.1% in the EMDA group (P ≥ 0.05). After the 12-month follow-up, only 1 progression occurred in each treatment group. In terms of adverse events, no significant differences were found between the treatments.ConclusionsHIVEC and EMDA techniques are comparable in terms of recurrence, progression and adverse events at 12 months in the treatment of patients with high- and intermediate-risk NMIBC.