BACKGROUND: To evaluate the survival benefit of gemcitabine and paclitaxel (GT) chemotherapy for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (UC), a retrospective analysis was performed to compare the overall survival in two periods: before (group I) and after (group II) the introduction of GT chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-five patients with metastatic UC were treated with MEC/MVAC (methotrexate, epirubicin, and cisplatin / methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) or GT between 1995 and 2007. The response rate, maintenance rate, maintenance duration of each regimen, and the survival times of responding patients in each group were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: The median survival of patients in group ΙI (20 months) was significantly longer than that for group I (13 months) (p = 0.03). Especially in patients with a favorable response (CR/PR) to induction chemotherapy, the median survival period was significantly different between group Ι and group II (median 15 and 28 months, respectively; p = 0.02). The rate of the shift to maintenance chemotherapy when using GT chemotherapy was significantly higher than with MEC/MVAC chemotherapy alone (p < 0.05), and the cessation rate due to adverse effects was significantly lower when using GT chemotherapy (26.1%) than MEC/MVAC in group Ι (42.1%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrated that the administration of GT chemotherapy may be useful to improve the survival of patients with metastatic UC. This effect was significant, especially among those who were sensitive to the induction course of first-line chemotherapy. The excellent tolerability of GT regimens mean that they may be suitable for maintenance chemotherapy.
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the survival benefit of gemcitabine and paclitaxel (GT) chemotherapy for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (UC), a retrospective analysis was performed to compare the overall survival in two periods: before (group I) and after (group II) the introduction of GT chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-five patients with metastatic UC were treated with MEC/MVAC (methotrexate, epirubicin, and cisplatin / methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) or GT between 1995 and 2007. The response rate, maintenance rate, maintenance duration of each regimen, and the survival times of responding patients in each group were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: The median survival of patients in group ΙI (20 months) was significantly longer than that for group I (13 months) (p = 0.03). Especially in patients with a favorable response (CR/PR) to induction chemotherapy, the median survival period was significantly different between group Ι and group II (median 15 and 28 months, respectively; p = 0.02). The rate of the shift to maintenance chemotherapy when using GT chemotherapy was significantly higher than with MEC/MVAC chemotherapy alone (p < 0.05), and the cessation rate due to adverse effects was significantly lower when using GT chemotherapy (26.1%) than MEC/MVAC in group Ι (42.1%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrated that the administration of GT chemotherapy may be useful to improve the survival of patients with metastatic UC. This effect was significant, especially among those who were sensitive to the induction course of first-line chemotherapy. The excellent tolerability of GT regimens mean that they may be suitable for maintenance chemotherapy.
Authors: S B Saxman; K J Propert; L H Einhorn; E D Crawford; I Tannock; D Raghavan; P J Loehrer; D Trump Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: P J Loehrer; L H Einhorn; P J Elson; E D Crawford; P Kuebler; I Tannock; D Raghavan; R Stuart-Harris; M F Sarosdy; B A Lowe Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1992-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Robert Dreicer; Judith Manola; Daniel J Schneider; John F Schwerkoske; Christopher S George; Bruce J Roth; George Wilding Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: B J Roth; R Dreicer; L H Einhorn; D Neuberg; D H Johnson; J L Smith; G R Hudes; S M Schultz; P J Loehrer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1994-11 Impact factor: 44.544