Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients With Upper Tract Urothelial Cancer: Oncologic Outcomes From a Multicenter Study
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, multicentrická studie
PubMed
35125303
DOI
10.1016/j.clgc.2022.01.004
PII: S1558-7673(22)00004-0
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Age, Nephroureterectomy, Perioperative chemotherapy, Survival, Transitional cell carcinoma,
- MeSH
- cisplatina terapeutické užití MeSH
- karcinom z přechodných buněk * patologie MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory močového měchýře * patologie MeSH
- neoadjuvantní terapie škodlivé účinky MeSH
- protokoly protinádorové kombinované chemoterapie MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
- Názvy látek
- cisplatina MeSH
INTRODUCTION: Although upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is more common in the elderly, outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in this population have never been explored. The objective of the study was to assess the impact of NAC on pathologic response and oncological outcomes stratified by age. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter study included 164 patients treated with NAC and radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for clinically non-metastatic, high-risk UTUC. The cohort was stratified into two groups according to median age. Patients received either cisplatin-based or non-cisplatin-based chemotherapies. Pathologic responses were defined as pathologic objective response (pOR; ≤ ypT1N0) and pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0N0). Univariable and multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed to identify predictors for pathologic response and survival outcomes. RESULTS: The cohorts' median age was 68 years with the elderly group (> 68 years) comprising 74 patients. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy included methotrexate-vinblastine-doxorubicin-cisplatin (MVAC) in 66 (40%), gemcitabine cisplatin (GC) in 66 (40%) and non-cisplatin chemotherapy in 32 patients (20%). Younger patients received more often MVAC (50% vs. 28%) while elderly received more GC (34% vs. 47%) or non-cisplatin chemotherapy (16% vs. 24%) (P = .02). Overall, pOR and pCR were similar across age groups (52% vs. 47%; P = .5 and 10% vs. 8%; P = .7). While GC and non-cisplatin chemotherapy showed a lower pCR of 5% and 3%, respectively, MVAC revealed a pCR of 17% (P = .03) and was independently associated with a higher pCR (OR 4.31; P = .03). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference in recurrence-free and cancer-specific survival, whereas a lower rate was seen in overall survival for the elderly. CONCLUSION: Elderly patients with high-risk UTUC eligible for cisplatin-based NAC prior to RNU may benefit from this multimodal therapy equally as their younger counterparts. Cisplatin-ineligible patients undergoing non-cisplatin-based NAC appeared to have lower response rates and should be considered for immediate RNU.
Department of Urology Bichat Hospital Paris Descartes University Paris France
Department of Urology IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital and Scientific Institute Milan Italy
Department of Urology Luzerner Kantonsspital Luzern Switzerland
Department of Urology Semmelweis University Budapest Hungary
Department of Urology University of Brescia Spedali Civili di Brescia Brescia Italy
Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas TX
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org