
Opinion|Videos|January 28, 2025
Enhancing Access to BCG-Unresponsive NMIBC Treatments
Author(s)Max Kates, MD
Max Kates, MD, discusses how the ability to deliver newer treatments in local urology clinics rather than specialized centers reduces patient travel burden and improves access to care, while suggesting that increased education about safety profiles and implementation protocols could encourage broader adoption among health care providers.
Advertisement
Episodes in this series

- From an operational standpoint, how important is it that these treatments can be administered by urologists locally, without the need to refer patients to oncology centers? Please discuss overall burden on patients, systemic side effects, and travel to specialized centers
- What strategies would you recommend to encourage more HCPs to adopt newer treatment modalities for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC?
Advertisement
Related to this article

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.

The AMA issued separate codes for subfascial and subcutaneous implantation of a tibial neuromodulation device.

Exploratory analyses suggest persistent immune remodeling after aglatimagene plus radiation in localized prostate cancer.

John P. Sfakianos, MD, discusses how ctDNA can be optimally integrated into bladder cancer clinical trials.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Trending on Urology Times
1
Avoiding False Positives on Prostate Cancer PSMA PET Scans
2
The UroOnc Minute: Key Updates to the AUA NMIBC Guideline, With Peter E. Clark, MD
3
John Sfakianos, MD, on integrating ctDNA into bladder cancer trials
4
AMA issues Category I CPT codes for implantable tibial neuromodulation in UUI
5





