S Birkenhake1, S Leykamm, P Martus, R Sauer. 1. Department of Radiooncology, Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuernberg, Germany. stefan.birkenhake@strahlen.med.uni-erlangen.de
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate acute toxicity and efficacy of simultaneous radiochemotherapy for invasive urothelial cancer of the bladder. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From September 1993 to July 1997, 61 patients with invasive bladder cancer were treated with a transurethral resection (TURB) followed by radiochemotherapy (RCT). Twenty-five received a combination of 5-FU and cisplatin. The prescribed doses were 600 mg/m2 5-FU daily as continuous infusion over 5 days each in the 1st and 5th treatment week and 20 mg/m2 cisplatin daily at the same days as a short infusion. The pelvis was irradiated with 54 Gy, the bladder with 59.4 Gy and the paraaortic nodes in 7 cases with 45 Gy, respectively. Six to 8 weeks after RCT a second TURB was performed for reasons of restaging. RESULTS: Twenty out of 25 patients received at least 80% of the prescribed chemotherapy, in 13 cases the full dose could be given. Gastrointestinal toxicity of Grade I and II occurred in 10 cases, 1 patient developed severe diarrhea (Grade VI). After the 1st course of chemotherapy 7 patients had leuko- or thrombopenia of Grade III. One patient had a leucopenia of Grade IV. After the 2nd course 4 patients developed Grade III leuko- and thrombopenia, 1 of Grade IV. Two Grade II anemia were found. All more severe toxicities and necessary dose reductions were related to radiation of the paraaortic nodes. No life threatening infections, bleedings or cardiotoxicity was found. Restaging TURBs resulted in 22 complete remissions, 1 patient had a de-novo-carcinoma (Tis) at this time, 2 were non-responders (8%). After a median follow-up of 38 months 20 patients are alive (80%). CONCLUSIONS: 1. If irradiation of paraaortic nodes is necessary, 5-FU should not be applied, because the gastrointestinal toxicity is too extensive. In all other cases side effects are tolerable and can be managed by supportive care. 2. The first results are promising and should be evaluated in a prospective study.
PURPOSE: To evaluate acute toxicity and efficacy of simultaneous radiochemotherapy for invasive urothelial cancer of the bladder. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From September 1993 to July 1997, 61 patients with invasive bladder cancer were treated with a transurethral resection (TURB) followed by radiochemotherapy (RCT). Twenty-five received a combination of 5-FU and cisplatin. The prescribed doses were 600 mg/m2 5-FU daily as continuous infusion over 5 days each in the 1st and 5th treatment week and 20 mg/m2 cisplatin daily at the same days as a short infusion. The pelvis was irradiated with 54 Gy, the bladder with 59.4 Gy and the paraaortic nodes in 7 cases with 45 Gy, respectively. Six to 8 weeks after RCT a second TURB was performed for reasons of restaging. RESULTS: Twenty out of 25 patients received at least 80% of the prescribed chemotherapy, in 13 cases the full dose could be given. Gastrointestinal toxicity of Grade I and II occurred in 10 cases, 1 patient developed severe diarrhea (Grade VI). After the 1st course of chemotherapy 7 patients had leuko- or thrombopenia of Grade III. One patient had a leucopenia of Grade IV. After the 2nd course 4 patients developed Grade III leuko- and thrombopenia, 1 of Grade IV. Two Grade II anemia were found. All more severe toxicities and necessary dose reductions were related to radiation of the paraaortic nodes. No life threatening infections, bleedings or cardiotoxicity was found. Restaging TURBs resulted in 22 complete remissions, 1 patient had a de-novo-carcinoma (Tis) at this time, 2 were non-responders (8%). After a median follow-up of 38 months 20 patients are alive (80%). CONCLUSIONS: 1. If irradiation of paraaortic nodes is necessary, 5-FU should not be applied, because the gastrointestinal toxicity is too extensive. In all other cases side effects are tolerable and can be managed by supportive care. 2. The first results are promising and should be evaluated in a prospective study.
Authors: A B Einstein; M Wolf; K R Halliday; G J Miller; M Hafermann; B A Lowe; F J Meyers; J T Leimert; E D Crawford Journal: Urology Date: 1996-05 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: K J Russell; M A Boileau; C Higano; C Collins; A H Russell; W Koh; S B Cole; W H Chapman; T W Griffin Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1990-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: W Tester; A Porter; S Asbell; C Coughlin; J Heaney; J Krall; K Martz; P Venner; E Hammond Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1993-04-02 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J Dunst; R Sauer; K M Schrott; R Kühn; C Wittekind; A Altendorf-Hofmann Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1994-09-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: H Tsujii; H Akaza; M Ohtani; N Miyanaga; T Shimazoi; K Uchida; K Koiso; H Tsuji; T Okumura; K Ohara Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 1994-09 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Aaron P Brown; David S Wendler; Kevin A Camphausen; Franklin G Miller; Deborah Citrin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-08-20 Impact factor: 44.544