Bogdana Schmidt
· Assistant Professor (Clinical)VerifiedUniversity of Utah · Urology
Active 1967–2026
About
Bogdana Schmidt, MD, MPH, is a urologic surgeon at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, Utah, specializing in urologic oncology. She attended the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, where she completed her residency training, and then completed a Society of Urologic Oncology fellowship at Stanford University. Her clinical interests include the treatment of bladder cancer, kidney cancer, prostate cancer, testis cancer, and penile cancer, as well as novel imaging technologies, organ preservation, and minimally invasive/robotic urology procedures. Her research focuses on improving patient risk stratification and surgical outcomes, quality improvement in urologic oncology, addressing health disparities, and integrating artificial intelligence and advanced imaging techniques into urologic care.
Research topics
- Internal medicine
- Medicine
- Urology
- Surgery
Selected publications
Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumors
Urologic Clinics of North America · 2026-05-01
articleSenior authorCorrespondingJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2026-03-01
article707 Background: Since 2023, the combination of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab (EV+P) has become a first-line (1L) non-chemotherapy (chemo) standard-of-care option for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, real-world (RW) data on clinical outcomes for EV+P remain limited. We evaluated RW clinical outcomes among patients (pts) with mUC treated with either EV+P or chemo in US community oncology practices in the 1L setting, as well as second-line (2L) utilization patterns of EV+P and chemo. Methods: We used the deidentified Integra PrecisionQ database to identify mUC patients initiating 1L EV+P or chemo after December 1, 2023. Index date was defined as the start of 1L therapy. Baseline pt characteristics collected include age at index date, sex, race, payer, ECOG performance status, and metastatic type (de novo metastatic disease vs. recurrent). Time to discontinuation (TTD) was defined as the time from the index date to 1L discontinuation or death. Time to next treatment (TTNT) was defined as the time from the index date to the date of any subsequent systemic treatment (2L) or death. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was performed to evaluate the association between treatment type and TTNT, adjusting for covariates. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are presented. The distribution of 2L regimens was assessed for pts who initiated 2L therapy. Results: A total of 535 pts met study eligibility, of whom 406 (76%; median age [IQR]: 74 yr [67,81]) received EV+P as 1L therapy, and 129 received chemo (24%; median age [IQR]: 72 yr [65,79]). Overall, 91% of the cohort presented with de novo metastatic disease. The median follow-up for the study cohort was 4.7 mo (range: 0.03-18.9), during which 157/535 pts had died (EV+P: 117/406; chemo: 40/129). The table summarizes TTD and TTNT results. Of the 535 pts, 90 initiated 2L during the follow-up period, with most pts (32/46) who received 1L EV+P initiating chemo in the 2L setting. More than half of pts (24/44) who received 1L chemo received 2L EV+P. Conclusions: The adoption of EV+P as 1L therapy for mUC has been rapid since 2023 in US community oncology practices. Use of EV+P use was observed to be associated with longer time to 1L TTD and TTNT. Among pts who initiated 2L, EV+P treatment crossover between regimens is common. Median Time to Event (95% CI), mo Chemo (n=129) EV+P (n=406) logrank P value aHR for EV+P vs. chemo (95% CI) P value TTD 2.3 (1.9, 2.9) 5.9 (5, 7.5) <0.001 0.41 (0.31, 0.54) <0.001 TTNT 6.6 (3.3, 10.8) 9.7 (8.4, 10.6) 0.038 0.74 (0.55, 1.00) 0.051
European Urology · 2026-02-01
articleThe Journal of Urology · 2026-05-01
articleThe Journal of Urology · 2026-04-27
articleJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025-05-28
articlee17057 Background: Currently non-specific protein factors (Alkaline Phosphatase-ALK, LDH, albumin) are used for identifying prognostic risk groups in mCRPC. We explored NGS-based proteome sequencing for scalable and high-throughput plasma proteomic profiling for developing an integrated approach of mCRPC tumor-biology associated proteins with existing biomarkers based on patient-centric nomograms that estimate 6-, 12- and 24-months overall survival (OS) probabilities. Methods: Proteomic profiling of plasma for 3,072 proteins using Olink Explore NGS platform was performed in 32 local stage prostate cancer, 123 metastatic hormone-sensitive (mHSPC) and 157 mCRPC state samples (Total N = 312) in a clinically annotated real-world cohort study. Proteins were measured in Normalized Protein eXpression (NPX) units. NPX values of all proteins across all three cancer states were compared to identify Differentially Expressed Proteins (DEPs) exclusively to mCRPC using t-test with multiple corrections. Clinical outcome in the mCRPC was overall survival (OS) and Hazard Ratios (HRs) for mCRPC-DEPs with significant (P<0.05) association with survival at a univariate level were build into an aggregated composite score generated by multiplying each individual DEP’s univariate-level survival HR coefficient with the corresponding NPX value. The “Composite Proteome Prognostic Score (CPPS)” range for the mCRPC cohort (N = 121 pts) was dichotomized above and below the cohort median as “High” and “Low” and evaluated using Cox Proportional Hazard Regression along with current prognostic protein biomarkers (PSA, LDH, Alkaline Phosphatase and Albumin) at the univariate level and included in multi-variable analysis (MVA) for univariate-level significant (P<0.05) variables. Prognostic nomogram integrating MVA significant clinical factors with the CPPS was developed and nomogram performance with and without CPPS for estimating 6-,12- and 24-months survival was determined using Area Under Curve (AUC). Results: Median OS of the mCRPC cohort (N = 157) was 28 months (range: 0.3-45). 866/3072 DEPs were exclusive to mCRPC and 252/866 associated with OS (HR > 1; P < 0.05). 102/252 DEPs were significant after multiple correction (FDR < 0.05). The top 20 DEPs were used to generate CPPS. The CPPS HR value of 3.48 (95% CI: 1.77-6.83) was higher compared to known clinical factors including PSA, LDH , Alkaline Phosphatase, Albumin. AUCs for estimating mCRPC OS probabilities integrating CPPS with clinical factors versus clinical factors alone increased to 0.90 from 0.83 (6-months); 0.86 from 0.72 (12-months) and 0.76 from 0.69 (24-months). Conclusions: A patient-centric nomogram to estimate survival in mCRPC which includes novel protein classifiers can enhance current prognostication models.
Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2025-09-11 · 11 citations
articleOpen accessPURPOSE: The evolving treatment landscape of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) increasingly warrants novel trial design to evaluate perioperative strategies aimed at bladder preservation. To establish standardized outcome measures for evaluating organ preservation strategies in MIBC, the International Bladder Cancer Group (IBCG) and the Global Society of Rare Genitourinary Tumors (GSRGT) assembled an international, multidisciplinary consensus panel. METHODS: The IBCG and GSRGT gathered global bladder cancer experts and patient advocates to establish a framework for risk-adapted bladder-sparing treatment approaches for MIBC. Working groups reviewed the literature and developed draft recommendations, which were discussed at a live meeting in December 2024 in Milan. This was followed by voting by the members using a modified Delphi process. Recommendations achieving ≥75% agreement during the meeting were further refined and presented. RESULTS: Clinical complete response (cCR) definition should encompass the absence of high-grade malignancy on pathology and malignant cells on urine cytology and no evidence of local or metastatic disease on cross-sectional imaging. Although cCR remains immature as a primary or coprimary end point in registrational trials, it could serve as a suitable end point in early-phase studies and risk-adapted investigations. Event-free survival (EFS) remains the preferred primary end point as it could reliably capture the durability of clinically meaningful benefit after omittance of surgical consolidation or chemoradiation. Given the composite nature of EFS, events should be prespecified, evaluated in an intention-to-treat approach, and meticulously collected. Continuous assessment of individual patient preferences should begin at the outset of perioperative therapy discussions, with informed decision making prioritized throughout. CONCLUSION: The consensus definition of cCR and the framework presented in this study can serve as a foundation for thorough testing of risk-adapted bladder-sparing treatment paradigms for MIBC.
Urology · 2025-04-17
editorialSenior authorThe Journal of Urology · 2025-04-08
articleClinical Proteomics · 2025-04-18 · 1 citations
articleOpen accessBACKGROUND: Plasma-based high-plex proteomic profiling were performed in prostate cancer (PC) patients using the Olink® Explore Proximity Extension Assay to identify plasma proteins associated in different PC states and to explore potential prognostic biomarkers. The progressive PC states include local, organ-confined PC (local PC), metastatic hormone-sensitive PC (mHSPC) and metastatic castrate-resistant PC (mCRPC). METHODS: Plasma samples were uniformly processed from 84 PC patients (10 patients with local PC; 29 patients with mHSPC; 45 patients with mCRPC). A proteome-wide association study was performed to identify proteins differentially overexpressed in progressive cancer states. Specifically, a sequential screening approach was employed where proteins overexpressed from one disease state were assessed for overexpression in the progressive disease state. Linear regression, analysis of variance, and t-tests were used for this approach. Differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) in mCRPC were then used to construct a prognostic model for overall survival (OS) in mCRPC patients using the Cox Proportional Hazard Model. The predictive performance of this model was assessed using time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (tAUC) in an independent sample of mCRPC patients. The tAUC of the prognostic model was then compared to that of a model excluding DEPs to evaluate the added value of circulatory proteins in predicting survival. RESULTS: Of 736 tumor-associated proteins, 26 were differentially expressed across local PC, mHSPC, and mCRPC states. Among these, 20 were overexpressed in metastatic states compared to local, and in mCRPC compared to mHSPC states. Of these 20 proteins, Ribonucleoside-diphosphate reductase subunit M2 (RRM2) was identified as a prognostic biomarker for OS in mCRPC, with a hazard ratio of 2.30 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17-4.51) per normalized expression unit increase. The tAUC of the model including previously identified clinical prognostic factors was 0.62 (95% CI 0.29-0.91), whereas the model that includes RRM2 with clinical prognostic factors was 0.87 (95% CI 0.51-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Plasma proteome profiling can identify novel circulatory DEPs associated with mCRPC state survivals. Overexpression of RRM2 is linked to poor mCRPC survival and its inclusion alongside conventional prognostic factors enhances the predictive performance of the prognostic model.
Frequent coauthors
- 17 shared
John T. Leppert
Stanford Medicine
- 14 shared
Alejandro Sánchez
The University of Texas at El Paso
- 12 shared
Alan Thong
Stanford University
- 11 shared
Christopher Dechet
Huntsman Cancer Institute
- 10 shared
Brock O’Neil
Community Living
- 8 shared
Jonathan D. Tward
- 8 shared
Joseph C. Liao
New York University
- 8 shared
I‐Chun Thomas
VA Palo Alto Health Care System
Education
M.D.
University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine
Other, Residency Training
University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine
Other, Society of Urologic Oncology fellowship
Stanford University
- Resume-aware match score
- Save to shortlist
- AI-drafted outreach
See your match with Bogdana Schmidt
PhdFit ranks faculty by your research interests, methods, and publications — grounded in their actual work, not templates.
- Free to start
- No credit card
- 30-second signup