Kaasinen and colleagues are to be congratulated for contributing one of the best descriptions of the long-term, treatment-modified history of carcinoma in situ (CIS) of the bladder. The primary outcome of the study of BCG versus BCG alternating with mitomycin C (MMC) reported a 10% higher recurrence rate in the BCG/MMC arm. This finding could plausibly be attributed to the known poorer efficacy for CIS of MMC compared to BCG, as the treatment schedule provided 11 MMC instillations and just five BCG instillations over a period of 1 year in one arm compared to 16 BCG instillations in the other arm. What is noteworthy is that, first, even the predominantly MMC arm achieved a marked improvement over the expected natural history of (untreated) CIS. Secondly, while the Kaplan–Meier curves for progression separate, albeit non-significantly, in the two arms, the curves for disease-specific mortality and overall survival intertwine, even for patients followed up for as long as 20 years. Does this imply that chemotherapy may be good enough for some patients with CIS, i.e. those who are unable to tolerate BCG? Thirdly, on the issue of risk of progression, this article suggests that younger patients (< 65 years) and those with exophytic tumour and concomitant CIS (vs primary or secondary CIS) are at higher risk. Lastly, Kaasinen et al. report a 5.7% incidence of usually fatal progressions in patients who remain at risk beyond 10 years, raising a debate on long-term surveillance strategies.
Free access
Editorial comments on: Seventeen-year follow-up of the prospective randomized Nordic CIS study: BCG monotherapy versus alternating therapy with mitomycin C and BCG in patients with carcinoma in situ of the urinary bladder, by E. Kaasinen et al. (in this issue)
Reprints and Corporate Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:
Academic Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:
If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.
Related research
People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.
Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.
Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.
Your download is now in progress and you may close this window
- Choose new content alerts to be informed about new research of interest to you
- Easy remote access to your institution's subscriptions on any device, from any location
- Save your searches and schedule alerts to send you new results
- Export your search results into a .csv file to support your research
Login now Don't have an account?
Register for free
Login or register to access this feature
Login now Don't have an account?
Register for free
- Choose new content alerts to be informed about new research of interest to you
- Easy remote access to your institution's subscriptions on any device, from any location
- Save your searches and schedule alerts to send you new results
- Export your search results into a .csv file to support your research
Register now or learn more