» Articles » PMID: 29077785

Impact of Contemporary Patterns of Chemotherapy Utilization on Survival in Patients with Advanced Cancer of the Urinary Tract: a Retrospective International Study of Invasive/Advanced Cancer of the Urothelium (RISC)

Overview
Journal Ann Oncol
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Oncology
Date 2017 Oct 28
PMID 29077785
Citations 29
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the standard treatment of advanced urinary tract cancer (aUTC), but 50% of patients are ineligible for cisplatin according to recently published criteria. We used a multinational database to study patterns of chemotherapy utilization in patients with aUTC and determine their impact on survival.

Patients And Methods: This was a retrospective study of patients with: UTC (bladder, renal pelvis, ureter or urethra); advanced disease (stages T4b and/or N+ and/or M+); urothelial, squamous or adenocarcinoma histology. Primary objective was overall survival (OS). Eligibility-for-cisplatin was defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 1, creatinine clearance ≥ 60 ml/min, no hearing loss, no neuropathy and no heart failure. Cox regression multivariate analyses were used to establish independent associations of cisplatin versus noncisplatin-based chemotherapy on OS.

Results: 1794 patients treated between 2000 and 2013 at 29 centers were analyzed. Median follow-up was 29.1 months. About 1333 patients (74%) received first-line chemotherapy: the use of first-line chemotherapy was associated with longer OS: [hazard ratio (HR): 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.67-2.20]. Type of first-line chemotherapy received was: cisplatin-based 669 (50%), carboplatin-based 399 (30%) and other 265 (20%). Cisplatin use was an independent favorable prognostic factor (HR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.35-1.77). This benefit was independent of baseline characteristics or comorbidities but was associated with eligibility-for-cisplatin: eligible patients treated with cisplatin lived longer than those who were not (HR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.36-2.21), while such benefit was not observed among ineligible patients. About 26% of patients who did not receive cisplatin were eligible for this agent. Median OS of ineligible patients was poor irrespective of the chemotherapy used.

Conclusions: The importance of applying published criteria of eligibility-for-cisplatin was confirmed in a multinational, real-world setting in aUTC. The reasons for deviations from these criteria set targets to improve adherence. Effective therapies for cisplatin-ineligible patients are needed.

Citing Articles

Role of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Genitourinary Malignancies.

Khorasanchi A, Jatwani K, Meng L, Collier K, Sundi D, Dason S Cancers (Basel). 2025; 16(24).

PMID: 39766027 PMC: 11674059. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16244127.


Real-World Study of Treatment with Pembrolizumab Among Patients with Advanced Urothelial Tract Cancer in Denmark.

Omland L, Stormoen D, Dohn L, Carus A, Als A, Jensen N Bladder Cancer. 2024; 7(4):413-425.

PMID: 38993987 PMC: 11181703. DOI: 10.3233/BLC-211523.


A Podcast on Platinum Eligibility and Treatment Sequencing in Platinum-Eligible Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

Gupta S, Moon H, Sridhar S Target Oncol. 2024; 19(4):483-494.

PMID: 38963655 PMC: 11231000. DOI: 10.1007/s11523-024-01074-9.


How Immunotherapy Has Redefined the Treatment Paradigm of Metastatic or Locally Advanced Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma.

Larroquette M, Lefort F, Domblides C, Heraudet L, Robert G, Ravaud A Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(9).

PMID: 38730732 PMC: 11083785. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16091780.


Cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors in treating metastatic urothelial cancer.

Yang L, Li J, Chen C, Cheng C, Hung S, Chiu K Front Pharmacol. 2024; 15:1281654.

PMID: 38595923 PMC: 11002236. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1281654.


References
1.
Bamias A, Peroukidis S, Stamatopoulou S, Tzannis K, Koutsoukos K, Andreadis C . Utilization of Systemic Chemotherapy in Advanced Urothelial Cancer: A Retrospective Collaborative Study by the Hellenic Genitourinary Cancer Group (HGUCG). Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2015; 14(2):e153-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2015.09.009. View

2.
Sonpavde G, Watson D, Tourtellott M, Cowey C, Hellerstedt B, Hutson T . Administration of cisplatin-based chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma in the community. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2012; 10(1):1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2011.11.005. View

3.
Bamias A, Dafni U, Karadimou A, Timotheadou E, Aravantinos G, Psyrri A . Prospective, open-label, randomized, phase III study of two dose-dense regimens MVAC versus gemcitabine/cisplatin in patients with inoperable, metastatic or relapsed urothelial cancer: a Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group study (HE 16/03). Ann Oncol. 2012; 24(4):1011-7. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mds583. View

4.
De Santis M, Bellmunt J, Mead G, Kerst J, Leahy M, Maroto P . Randomized phase II/III trial assessing gemcitabine/ carboplatin and methotrexate/carboplatin/vinblastine in patients with advanced urothelial cancer "unfit" for cisplatin-based chemotherapy: phase II--results of EORTC study 30986. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(33):5634-9. PMC: 2792956. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.21.4924. View

5.
Necchi A, Sonpavde G, Lo Vullo S, Giardiello D, Bamias A, Crabb S . Nomogram-based Prediction of Overall Survival in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Receiving First-line Platinum-based Chemotherapy: Retrospective International Study of Invasive/Advanced Cancer of the Urothelium (RISC). Eur Urol. 2016; 71(2):281-289. PMC: 5576985. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.09.042. View