OBJECTIVES: To determine GFR with different methods in patients with first-line chemotherapy for advanced urothelial cancer (UC) and to evaluate the impact of these methods on the estimation of cisplatin eligibility. METHODS: A database was built retrospectively containing all patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for UC between 2001 and 2012 in one German high-volume center. GFR was calculated with the methods by Cockcroft-Gault (CG), MDRD and CKD-EPI. Measurements of creatinine clearance with timed urine collections were registered. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients were included. All methods of renal function determination yielded consistent results in terms of cisplatin eligibility for 134 patients (80.7 %) and disagreeing results for 32 patients (19.3 %). Twenty-two of these 32 patients with borderline GFR received cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Fifteen of these 22 patients completed at least three cycles. The mean GFR in the mentioned 32 patients was 51.3, 56.2 and 54.2 ml/min with the method by CG, MDRD and CKD-EPI. Three, ten and four patients were estimated cisplatin-eligible with either method. There was a good correlation between MDRD and CKD-EPI (r (2) = 0.92). CG tended to underestimate GFR compared to both MDRD and CKD-EPI. Measurements of creatinine clearance showed a wide distribution in comparison with MDRD (r (2) = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The method used to determine GFR influences the estimation of cisplatin eligibility in a subset of UC patients. MDRD and CKD-EPI formulas seem most valuable, while CG tends to underestimate renal function. Using a strict cutoff of 60 ml/min may unnecessarily preclude cisplatin in some patients.
OBJECTIVES: To determine GFR with different methods in patients with first-line chemotherapy for advanced urothelial cancer (UC) and to evaluate the impact of these methods on the estimation of cisplatin eligibility. METHODS: A database was built retrospectively containing all patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for UC between 2001 and 2012 in one German high-volume center. GFR was calculated with the methods by Cockcroft-Gault (CG), MDRD and CKD-EPI. Measurements of creatinine clearance with timed urine collections were registered. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients were included. All methods of renal function determination yielded consistent results in terms of cisplatin eligibility for 134 patients (80.7 %) and disagreeing results for 32 patients (19.3 %). Twenty-two of these 32 patients with borderline GFR received cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Fifteen of these 22 patients completed at least three cycles. The mean GFR in the mentioned 32 patients was 51.3, 56.2 and 54.2 ml/min with the method by CG, MDRD and CKD-EPI. Three, ten and four patients were estimated cisplatin-eligible with either method. There was a good correlation between MDRD and CKD-EPI (r (2) = 0.92). CG tended to underestimate GFR compared to both MDRD and CKD-EPI. Measurements of creatinine clearance showed a wide distribution in comparison with MDRD (r (2) = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The method used to determine GFR influences the estimation of cisplatin eligibility in a subset of UC patients. MDRD and CKD-EPI formulas seem most valuable, while CG tends to underestimate renal function. Using a strict cutoff of 60 ml/min may unnecessarily preclude cisplatin in some patients.
Authors: Matthew D Galsky; Noah M Hahn; Jonathan Rosenberg; Guru Sonpavde; Thomas Hutson; William K Oh; Robert Dreicer; Nicholas Vogelzang; Cora Sternberg; Dean F Bajorin; Joaquim Bellmunt Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Atreya Dash; Matthew D Galsky; Andrew J Vickers; Angel M Serio; Theresa M Koppie; Guido Dalbagni; Bernard H Bochner Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: H von der Maase; S W Hansen; J T Roberts; L Dogliotti; T Oliver; M J Moore; I Bodrogi; P Albers; A Knuth; C M Lippert; P Kerbrat; P Sanchez Rovira; P Wersall; S P Cleall; D F Roychowdhury; I Tomlin; C M Visseren-Grul; P F Conte Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M D Galsky; G J Chen; W K Oh; J Bellmunt; B J Roth; R Petrioli; L Dogliotti; R Dreicer; G Sonpavde Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-05-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Stevens; Christopher H Schmid; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Alejandro F Castro; Harold I Feldman; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Tom Greene; Josef Coresh Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 25.391