-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Identifying the Optimal Number of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Cycles in Patients with Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer
D. D'Andrea, PC. Black, H. Zargar, CP. Dinney, F. Soria, MS. Cookson, JS. Montgomery, W. Kassouf, MA. Dall'Era, SS. Sridhar, JS. McGrath, JL. Wright, AC. Thorpe, JM. Holzbeierlein, DM. Carrión, E. Di Trapani, TJ. Bivalacqua, S. North, DA....
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, multicentrická studie
- MeSH
- cystektomie MeSH
- invazivní růst nádoru MeSH
- kohortové studie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- míra přežití MeSH
- nádory močového měchýře farmakoterapie mortalita patologie chirurgie MeSH
- neoadjuvantní terapie statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
PURPOSE: We investigated the pathological response rates and survival associated with 3 vs 4 cycles of cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with cT2-4N0M0 muscle invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cohort study we analyzed clinical data of 828 patients treated with NAC and radical cystectomy between 2000 and 2020. A total of 384 and 444 patients were treated with 3 and 4 cycles of NAC, respectively. Pathological objective response (pOR; ypT0-Ta-Tis-T1 N0), pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0 N0), cancer-specific survival and overall survival were investigated. RESULTS: pOR and pCR were achieved in 378 (45%; 95% CI 42, 49) and 207 (25%; 95% CI 22, 28) patients, respectively. Patients treated with 4 cycles of NAC had higher pOR (49% vs 42%, p=0.03) and pCR (28% vs 21%, p=0.02) rates compared to those treated with 3 cycles. This effect was confirmed on multivariable logistic regression analysis (pOR OR 1.46 p=0.008, pCR OR 1.57, p=0.007). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, 4 cycles of NAC were significantly associated with overall survival (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.49, 0.94; p=0.02) but not with cancer-specific survival (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.50, 1.04; p=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Four cycles of NAC achieved better pathological response and survival compared to 3 cycles. These findings may aid clinicians in counseling patients and serve as a benchmark for prospective trials. Prospective validation of these findings and assessment of cumulative toxicity derived from an increased number of cycles are needed.
Cross Cancer Institute Edmonton Alberta Canada
Department of Oncology University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada
Department of Surgery McGill University Health Center Montreal Canada
Department of Urologic Sciences University of British Columbia Vancouver British Columbia Canada
Department of Urologic Surgery Vanderbilt University Medical Center Nashville Tennessee
Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prag Czech Republic
Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria
Department of Urology European Institute of Oncology IRCCS Milan Italy
Department of Urology Freeman Hospital Newcastle Upon Tyne UK
Department of Urology Louisiana Paz University Hospital Madrid Spain
Department of Urology MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston Texas
Department of Urology Molinette Hospital University of Turin Turin Italy
Department of Urology University of California at Davis Davis Medical Center Sacramento California
Department of Urology University of Kansas Medical Center Kansas City Kansas
Department of Urology University of Michigan Health System Ann Arbor Michigan
Department of Urology University of Oklahoma College of Medicine Oklahoma City Oklahoma
Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
Department of Urology University of Washington Seattle Washington
Department of Urology Western Health Melbourne Australia
Departments of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York New York
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22011526
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20220506130053.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 220425s2022 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1097/JU.0000000000002190 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)34445891
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a D'Andrea, David $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $1 https://orcid.org/0000000316251077
- 245 10
- $a Identifying the Optimal Number of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Cycles in Patients with Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer / $c D. D'Andrea, PC. Black, H. Zargar, CP. Dinney, F. Soria, MS. Cookson, JS. Montgomery, W. Kassouf, MA. Dall'Era, SS. Sridhar, JS. McGrath, JL. Wright, AC. Thorpe, JM. Holzbeierlein, DM. Carrión, E. Di Trapani, TJ. Bivalacqua, S. North, DA. Barocas, Y. Lotan, P. Grivas, AJ. Stephenson, BW. van Rhijn, S. Daneshmand, PE. Spiess, SF. Shariat, Contributors
- 520 9_
- $a PURPOSE: We investigated the pathological response rates and survival associated with 3 vs 4 cycles of cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with cT2-4N0M0 muscle invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cohort study we analyzed clinical data of 828 patients treated with NAC and radical cystectomy between 2000 and 2020. A total of 384 and 444 patients were treated with 3 and 4 cycles of NAC, respectively. Pathological objective response (pOR; ypT0-Ta-Tis-T1 N0), pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0 N0), cancer-specific survival and overall survival were investigated. RESULTS: pOR and pCR were achieved in 378 (45%; 95% CI 42, 49) and 207 (25%; 95% CI 22, 28) patients, respectively. Patients treated with 4 cycles of NAC had higher pOR (49% vs 42%, p=0.03) and pCR (28% vs 21%, p=0.02) rates compared to those treated with 3 cycles. This effect was confirmed on multivariable logistic regression analysis (pOR OR 1.46 p=0.008, pCR OR 1.57, p=0.007). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, 4 cycles of NAC were significantly associated with overall survival (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.49, 0.94; p=0.02) but not with cancer-specific survival (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.50, 1.04; p=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Four cycles of NAC achieved better pathological response and survival compared to 3 cycles. These findings may aid clinicians in counseling patients and serve as a benchmark for prospective trials. Prospective validation of these findings and assessment of cumulative toxicity derived from an increased number of cycles are needed.
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a kohortové studie $7 D015331
- 650 _2
- $a cystektomie $7 D015653
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a neoadjuvantní terapie $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D020360
- 650 _2
- $a invazivní růst nádoru $7 D009361
- 650 _2
- $a míra přežití $7 D015996
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 650 _2
- $a nádory močového měchýře $x farmakoterapie $x mortalita $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D001749
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
- 700 1_
- $a Black, Peter C $u Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a Zargar, Homayoun $u Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada $u Department of Urology, Western Health, Melbourne, Australia
- 700 1_
- $a Dinney, Colin P $u Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- 700 1_
- $a Soria, Francesco $u Department of Urology, Molinette Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Cookson, Michael S $u Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
- 700 1_
- $a Montgomery, Jeffrey S $u Department of Urology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- 700 1_
- $a Kassouf, Wassim $u Department of Surgery (Division of Urology), McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a Dall'Era, Marc A $u Department of Urology, University of California at Davis, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California
- 700 1_
- $a Sridhar, Srikala S $u Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a McGrath, John S $u Department of Surgery, Exeter Surgical Health Services Research Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust, Exeter, UK
- 700 1_
- $a Wright, Jonathan L $u Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
- 700 1_
- $a Thorpe, Andrew C $u Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
- 700 1_
- $a Holzbeierlein, Jeff M $u Department of Urology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas
- 700 1_
- $a Carrión, Diego M $u Department of Urology, Louisiana Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
- 700 1_
- $a Di Trapani, Ettore $u Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Bivalacqua, Trinity J $u Department of Urology, The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
- 700 1_
- $a North, Scott $u Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada $u Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a Barocas, Daniel A $u Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
- 700 1_
- $a Lotan, Yair $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
- 700 1_
- $a Grivas, Petros $u Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington $u Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
- 700 1_
- $a Stephenson, Andrew J $u Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- 700 1_
- $a van Rhijn, Bas W $u Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- 700 1_
- $a Daneshmand, Siamak $u USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
- 700 1_
- $a Spiess, Philippe E $u Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida
- 700 1_
- $a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas $u Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York $u Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prag, Czech Republic $u Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
- 710 2_
- $a Contributors
- 773 0_
- $w MED00003040 $t The Journal of urology $x 1527-3792 $g Roč. 207, č. 1 (2022), s. 70-76
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34445891 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20220425 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20220506130046 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1789235 $s 1162724
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2022 $b 207 $c 1 $d 70-76 $e 20210827 $i 1527-3792 $m The Journal of urology $n J Urol $x MED00003040
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20220425
