Tülay Kuş1, Gökmen Aktaş1. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Gaziantep University School of Medicine, Gaziantep, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of gemcitabine maintenance treatment on survival in patients with metastatic bladder cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Gemcitabine maintenance monotherapy was administered following the standard platinum-gemcitabine therapy in patients with metastatic bladder cancer. Patients who had responded to standard treatment received maintenance gemcitabine therapy as 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every three weeks until progression or development of unacceptable toxicity. The following clinical factors were noted: performance status, age, sex, stage, site of metastasis, choice of cisplatin-gemcitabine or carboplatin-gemcitabine, response rates to the initial chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for standard treatment, and following gemcitabine monotreatment and for maintenance gemcitabine therapy were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients with metastatic bladder cancer treated between February 2009 to October 2015 were evaluated retrospectively and 23 patients (26.1%) who had responded to six cycles of platinum-gemcitabine treatment were included in this study. Maintenance gamcitabine was administered for a median of 7 times (range 3-14 times). Grade 3 hematotoxicity according to the criteria of the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events was observed in 7 (30.4%) patients. Median PFS of patients was 46 (range: 30-82) weeks for platinum-based treatment plus maintenance gemcitabine therapy. A higher median PFS was obtained in patients who were <65 year-olds, without organ metastasis with objective response rate, however, it was statistically insignificant. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine maintenance therapy in metastatic bladder cancer patients who did not shown progression after the standard platinum-gemcitabine treatment contributes to survival and presents low toxicity profile, when compared to historical controls.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of gemcitabine maintenance treatment on survival in patients with metastatic bladder cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Gemcitabine maintenance monotherapy was administered following the standard platinum-gemcitabine therapy in patients with metastatic bladder cancer. Patients who had responded to standard treatment received maintenance gemcitabine therapy as 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every three weeks until progression or development of unacceptable toxicity. The following clinical factors were noted: performance status, age, sex, stage, site of metastasis, choice of cisplatin-gemcitabine or carboplatin-gemcitabine, response rates to the initial chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for standard treatment, and following gemcitabine monotreatment and for maintenance gemcitabine therapy were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients with metastatic bladder cancer treated between February 2009 to October 2015 were evaluated retrospectively and 23 patients (26.1%) who had responded to six cycles of platinum-gemcitabine treatment were included in this study. Maintenance gamcitabine was administered for a median of 7 times (range 3-14 times). Grade 3 hematotoxicity according to the criteria of the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events was observed in 7 (30.4%) patients. Median PFS of patients was 46 (range: 30-82) weeks for platinum-based treatment plus maintenance gemcitabine therapy. A higher median PFS was obtained in patients who were <65 year-olds, without organ metastasis with objective response rate, however, it was statistically insignificant. CONCLUSION:Gemcitabine maintenance therapy in metastatic bladder cancerpatients who did not shown progression after the standard platinum-gemcitabine treatment contributes to survival and presents low toxicity profile, when compared to historical controls.
Authors: Richard Cathomas; Simon J Crabb; Michael Mark; Ralph Winterhalder; Christian Rothermundt; Tony Elliott; Philippe von Burg; Heike Kenner; Stefanie Hayoz; Simona Berardi Vilei; Daniel Rauch; Enrico Roggero; Markus G Mohaupt; Jürg Bernhard; Gabriela Manetsch; Silke Gillessen Journal: Prostate Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: X Garcia del Muro; E Marcuello; J Gumá; L Paz-Ares; M A Climent; J Carles; M Sánchez Parra; J L Tisaire; P Maroto; J R Germá Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2002-02-01 Impact factor: 7.640