Comparing how significantly the pharmacological treatment of genitourinary cancer in a non-curative setting affects endpoints of survival or response

Abstract

Prevalence of advanced genitourinary cancer is high considering approximately 70,000 patients die annually of prostate, bladder and kidney cancer in the United States. Treatment is non-curative but along with the aim of relieving symptoms and improving quality of life, patients and doctors are driven by the goal of prolonging life. In modern urological practice, with the ever increasing number of novel therapies, clinical benefit to patients has to be measured by evaluating the trial endpoints of response and survival against adverse events. This is especially true as the population with advanced cancer is increasingly older and co-morbid. Currently, we are in a time of exponential drug development, innumerable registered trials and a vast amount of expenditure on pharmacological cancer treatment. In this era of financial uncertainty, it is even more important for clinicians to objectively assess the benefit of these expensive, moderately effective treatments that still have associated adverse sequelae. We aim to highlight the pivotal data available and put into context the survival benefit we can currently achieve with the pharmacological treatment of advanced genitourinary cancer, allowing us to critically judge whether a potentially toxic systemic treatment is worthwhile or whether it is better to defer to best supportive care. The figures presented are from the key publications that form the basis of international guideline recommendations and are the standard that newly developed treatments must emulate.