BACKGROUND: Renal dysfunction, poor performance status, and comorbidities may preclude frontline cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The frequency of cisplatin-based chemotherapy administration in patients with advanced UC in community-based cancer centers is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate chemotherapy regimens administered to patients with the AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage-4 UC who, from 2001 to 2010, presented to Texas Oncology Cancer Centers. Frontline chemotherapy was classified as cisplatin based, carboplatin based, nonplatinum based, and as no chemotherapy administered. RESULTS: A total of 298 patients were eligible for analysis, of whom 197 (66.1%) were men. The median age was 70 years (range, 28-97 years), and the primary sites of disease were bladder (243 [81.5%]), renal pelvis (41 [13.8%]), and ureter (14 [4.7%]). Overall, the regimens administered were cisplatin based in 107 patients (35.9%), carboplatin based in 81 (27.2%), and nonplatinum based in 25 (8.4%); no chemotherapy was administered in 71 (23.8%), and data were not available in 14 patients (4.7%). Cisplatin administration was more common in patients aged ≤70 years (62/150 [41.3%]) as opposed to >70 years (45/148 [30.4%]) (P = .05). Noncisplatin regimens or no chemotherapy were trending to be more commonly administered to patients >70 years (64.2 vs. 54.7%; P = .10). Limitations of a retrospective database study apply. CONCLUSION: A first-line cisplatin-based regimen was administered to 35.9% of patients who presented with AJCC stage 4 UC in a community-based cancer center network. Drug development focused on tolerable single-agent therapy or combination regimens without a cisplatin backbone should be a priority.
BACKGROUND:Renal dysfunction, poor performance status, and comorbidities may preclude frontline cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The frequency of cisplatin-based chemotherapy administration in patients with advanced UC in community-based cancer centers is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate chemotherapy regimens administered to patients with the AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage-4 UC who, from 2001 to 2010, presented to Texas Oncology Cancer Centers. Frontline chemotherapy was classified as cisplatin based, carboplatin based, nonplatinum based, and as no chemotherapy administered. RESULTS: A total of 298 patients were eligible for analysis, of whom 197 (66.1%) were men. The median age was 70 years (range, 28-97 years), and the primary sites of disease were bladder (243 [81.5%]), renal pelvis (41 [13.8%]), and ureter (14 [4.7%]). Overall, the regimens administered were cisplatin based in 107 patients (35.9%), carboplatin based in 81 (27.2%), and nonplatinum based in 25 (8.4%); no chemotherapy was administered in 71 (23.8%), and data were not available in 14 patients (4.7%). Cisplatin administration was more common in patients aged ≤70 years (62/150 [41.3%]) as opposed to >70 years (45/148 [30.4%]) (P = .05). Noncisplatin regimens or no chemotherapy were trending to be more commonly administered to patients >70 years (64.2 vs. 54.7%; P = .10). Limitations of a retrospective database study apply. CONCLUSION: A first-line cisplatin-based regimen was administered to 35.9% of patients who presented with AJCC stage 4 UC in a community-based cancer center network. Drug development focused on tolerable single-agent therapy or combination regimens without a cisplatin backbone should be a priority.
Authors: Andrea Necchi; Guru Sonpavde; Salvatore Lo Vullo; Daniele Giardiello; Aristotelis Bamias; Simon J Crabb; Lauren C Harshman; Joaquim Bellmunt; Ugo De Giorgi; Cora N Sternberg; Linda Cerbone; Sylvain Ladoire; Yu-Ning Wong; Evan Y Yu; Simon Chowdhury; Gunter Niegisch; Sandy Srinivas; Ulka N Vaishampayan; Sumanta K Pal; Neeraj Agarwal; Ajjai Alva; Jack Baniel; Ali-Reza Golshayan; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Daniel W Bowles; Matthew I Milowsky; Christine Theodore; Dominik R Berthold; Gedske Daugaard; Srikala S Sridhar; Thomas Powles; Jonathan E Rosenberg; Matthew D Galsky; Luigi Mariani Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Lucia Carril-Ajuria; Maria Cruz Martin-Soberón; Guillermo de Velasco; Neeraj Agarwal; Daniel Castellano Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2022-01-22 Impact factor: 4.322
Authors: Elizabeth A Guancial; Breton Roussel; Derek P Bergsma; Kevin C Bylund; Deepak Sahasrabudhe; Edward Messing; Supriya G Mohile; Chunkit Fung Journal: Clin Interv Aging Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 4.458
Authors: A Bamias; K Tzannis; L C Harshman; S J Crabb; Y-N Wong; S Kumar Pal; U De Giorgi; S Ladoire; N Agarwal; E Y Yu; G Niegisch; A Necchi; C N Sternberg; S Srinivas; A Alva; U Vaishampayan; L Cerbone; M Liontos; J Rosenberg; T Powles; J Bellmunt; M D Galsky Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 51.769
Authors: Judit Börcsök; Zsofia Sztupinszki; Raie Bekele; Sizhi P Gao; Miklos Diossy; Amruta S Samant; Kasia M Dillon; Viktoria Tisza; Sándor Spisák; Orsolya Rusz; Istvan Csabai; Helle Pappot; Zoë J Frazier; David J Konieczkowski; David Liu; Naresh Vasani; James A Rodrigues; David B Solit; Jean H Hoffman-Censits; Elizabeth R Plimack; Jonathan E Rosenberg; Jean-Bernard Lazaro; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Gopa Iyer; Søren Brunak; Rita Lozsa; Eliezer M Van Allen; Dávid Szüts; Kent W Mouw; Zoltan Szallasi Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-11-18 Impact factor: 13.801