Opinion|Videos|August 20, 2024
Comparing Cretostimogene and BCG Administration Methods
Experts compare Cretostimogene and BCG Administration Methods
Advertisement
Episodes in this series
Video content above is prompted by the following questions:
- Can you describe the therapy dose, mode of administration, and duration?
- How does the administration method of cretostimogene compare to that of BCG?
- What were the primary and secondary endpoints of this trial?
Advertisement
Related to this article
Marie-Pier St-Laurent, MD, FRCSC, explains how NeoBLAST combines imaging, TURBT, and ctDNA to identify candidates for bladder-sparing surveillance.
Mark D. Tyson, II, MD, MPH, reviews emerging bladder-sparing therapies for NMIBC, highlighting cretostimogene data, treatment sequencing, and the need for comparative trials.
This FAQ outlines key recommendations and practical takeaways from the AUA/SUO guideline amendment on the diagnosis and treatment of NMIBC.
Peter Clark, MD, discusses key updates to NMIBC guidelines, including revisions to risk stratification, the emerging role of biomarkers, and how to navigate treatment options for BCG-unresponsive disease.
John P. Sfakianos, MD, discusses how ctDNA can be optimally integrated into bladder cancer clinical trials.
Armine K. Smith, MD, discusses the importance of integrating sexual health into bladder cancer care, including proactive counseling, preservation strategies, and multidisciplinary support.
One year following the approval of the gemcitabine intravesical system, Joseph Jacob, MD, reflects on the expanding treatment landscape in BCG-unresponsive NMIBC.
The PDUFA target action date is in the fourth quarter of 2026.
Advertisement
Advertisement