4.3 Article

Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, and Sunitinib for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma and as Preoperative Therapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

期刊

CLINICAL GENITOURINARY CANCER
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 175-181

出版社

CIG MEDIA GROUP, LP
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2012.10.001

关键词

Antiangiogenic therapy; Chemotherapy; Hematologic toxicity; Neoadjuvant; Phase II

资金

  1. Pfizer Inc, US Medical Oncology, New York, NY
  2. Pfizer Inc.
  3. Novartis
  4. Dendreon
  5. Celgene
  6. Merck
  7. sanofi
  8. Millennium
  9. Exelexis
  10. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  11. Genetech
  12. Pfizer
  13. Cephalon
  14. Celek
  15. Hoosier Oncology Group
  16. Endo Pharmaceuticals
  17. Bayer
  18. Medivation
  19. Tokai
  20. Glaxo Smith Klein
  21. Aveo

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Parallel trials in advanced disease and neoadjuvant settings are attractive for accelerating drug development in bladder cancer. However, the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin plus sunitinib was poorly tolerated in both settings, which highlighted the difficulties in combining targeted therapies with cytotoxic agents. Background: Data support chemotherapy combined with antiangiogenic therapy in metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) and muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). We investigated the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and sunitinib (GCS) in mUC and MIBC in parallel phase II trials. Patients and Methods: Trial 1 enrolled 36 patients with mUC who were chemotherapy naive; trial 2 enrolled 9 patients with MIBC. The primary endpoints for trials 1 and 2 were response rate and pathologic complete response, respectively. GCS was given as first-line treatment for patients with mUC and as neoadjuvant therapy for patients with MIBC. The Simon minimax 2-stage design was used for an objective response rate in trial 1 and for the pathologic complete response rate in trial 2. Results: The initial trial 1 GCS dose was gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously, days 1 and 8; cisplatin 70 mg/m2 intravenously, day 1; and sunitinib 37.5 mg orally daily, days 1 to 14 of a 21-day cycle. These doses proved intolerable. The doses of gemcitabine and cisplatin were subsequently reduced to 800 and 60 mg/m2, respectively, without an improvement in drug delivery, and the trial was closed. This lower-dose regimen was applied in trial 2, which was stopped early due to excess toxicity. Grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities occurred in 70% (23/33) of patients in trial 1 and 22% (2/9) of patients in trial 2. In trial 1, the response rate was 49% (95% CI, 31%-67%); in trial 2, the pathologic complete response was 22% (2/9). Due to early closure secondary to toxicity, the sample sizes of both trials were small. Conclusions: Delivery of GCS was hampered by excessive toxicity in both advanced and neoadjuvant settings. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据