Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention (아시아태평양암예방학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Gemcitabine Plus Nedaplatin as Salvage Therapy is a Favorable Option for Patients with Progressive Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma After Two Lines of Chemotherapy

  • Matsumoto, Kazumasa (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Mochizuki, Kohei (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Hirayama, Takahiro (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Ikeda, Masaomi (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Nishi, Morihiro (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Tabata, Ken-ichi (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Okazaki, Miyoko (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Fujita, Tetsuo (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Taoka, Yoshinori (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine) ;
  • Iwamura, Masatsugu (Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine)
  • Published : 2015.04.03
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a combination of gemcitabine and nedaplatin therapy among patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma previously treated with two lines of chemotherapy. Between February 2009 and August 2013, 30 patients were treated with gemcitabine and paclitaxel as a second-line chemotherapy. All had received a first-line chemotherapy consisting of methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin. Ten patients who had measurable histologically proven advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder and upper urinary tract received gemcitabine $1,000mg/m^2$ on days 1, 8 and 15 and nedaplatin $70mg/m^2$ on day 2 as a third-line chemotherapy. Tumors were assessed by imaging every two cycles. The median number of treatment cycles was 3.5. One patient had partial response and three had stable disease. The disease-control rate was 40%, the median overall survival was 8.8 months and the median progression-free survival was 5.0 months. The median overall survival times for the first-line and second-line therapies were 29.1 and 13.9 months, respectively. Among disease-controlled patients (n=4), median overall survival was 14.2 months. Myelosuppression was the most common toxicity. There were no therapy-related deaths. Gemcitabine and nedaplatin chemotherapy is a favorable third-line chemotherapeutic option for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Given the safety and benefit profile seen in this study, further prospective trials are warranted given the implications of our results with regard to strategic chemotherapy for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Keywords

References

  1. Abratt RP, Sandler A, Crino L, et al (1998). Combined cisplatin and gemcitabine for non-small cell lung cancer: influence of scheduling on toxicity and drug delivery. Semin Oncol, 25, 35-43.
  2. Anderson RS, el-Mahdi AM, Kuban DA, Higgins EM (1992). Brain metastases from transitional cell carcinoma of urinary bladder. Urology, 39, 17-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-4295(92)90034-T
  3. Bellmunt J, Theodore C, Demkov T, et al (2009). Phase III trial of vinflunine plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone after a platinum-containing regimen in patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract. J Clin Oncol, 27, 4454-61. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.5534
  4. Castellano D, Lianes P, Paz-Ares L, et al (1998). A phase II study of a novel gemcitabine plus cisplatin regimen administered every three weeks for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol, 9, 457-9. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008276507236
  5. Fokas E, Henzel M, Engenhart-Cabillic R (2010). A comparison of radiotherapy with radiotherapy plus surgery for brain metastases from urinary bladder cancer: analysis of 62 patients. Strahlenther Onkol, 186, 565-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-010-2159-5
  6. Hussain SA, James ND (2003). The systemic treatment of advanced and metastatic bladder cancer. Lancet Oncol, 4, 489-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(03)01168-9
  7. Ikeda M, Matsumoto K, Nishi M, et al (2014). Comparison of radical cystectomy and chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced bladder cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 6519-24. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.16.6519
  8. Ikeda M, Matsumoto K, Tabata K, et al (2011). Combination of gemcitabine and paclitaxel is a favorable option for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma previously treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Jpn J Clin Oncol, 41, 1214-20. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyr131
  9. Jamshed A, Hussain R, Iqbal H (2014). Gemcitabine and cisplatin followed by chemo-radiation for advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 899-904. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.2.899
  10. Kameyama Y, Okazaki N, Nakagawa M, et al (1990). Nephrotoxicity of a new platinum compound, 254-S, evaluated with rat kidney cortical slices. Toxicol Lett, 52, 15-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4274(90)90161-E
  11. Kaufman D, Raghavan D, Carducci M, et al (2000). Phase II trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. J Clin Oncol, 18, 1921-7.
  12. Kaufman DW, Shapiro S (2000). Epidemiological assessment of drug-induced disease. Lancet, 356, 1339-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02826-9
  13. Li CH, Liu MY, Liu W, et al (2014). Randomized control study of nedaplatin or cisplatin concomitant with other chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 731-6. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.2.731
  14. Mahmoud-Ahmed AS, Suh JH, Kupelian PA, et al (2002). Brain metastases from bladder carcinoma: presentation, treatment and survival. J Urol, 167, 2419-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64996-8
  15. Matsumoto K, Irie A, Satoh T, et al (2007). Gemcitabine and paclitaxel chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Int J Urol, 14, 1000-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2007.01889.x
  16. Matsumoto M, Takeda Y, Maki H, et al (2001). Preclinical in vivo antitumor efficacy of nedaplatin with gemcitabine against human lung cancer. Jpn J Cancer Res, 92, 51-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.2001.tb01047.x
  17. Pond GR, Bellmunt J, Rosenberg JE, et al (2014). Impact of the number of prior lines of therapy and prior perioperative chemotherapy in patients receiving salvage therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma: implications for trial design. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 13, 71-9
  18. Rozzi A, Santini D, Salerno M, et al (2013). Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin as third-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of urothelial tract: results of a phase II study. Med Oncol, 30, 407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-012-0407-5
  19. Soga N, Kise H, Arima K, Sugimura Y (2010). Third-line gemcitabine monotherapy for platinum-resistant advanced urothelial cancer. Int J Clin Oncol, 15, 376-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-010-0071-8
  20. von der Maase H, Sengelov L, Roberts JT, et al (2005). Long-term survival results of a randomized trial comparing gemcitabine plus cisplatin, with methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, plus cisplatin in patients with bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol, 23, 4602-8. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.07.757

Cited by

  1. Protein expression profile related to cisplatin resistance in bladder cancer cell lines detected by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis vol.36, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2220/biomedres.36.253
  2. Complete Response and Fatigue Improvement With the Combined Use of Cyclophosphamide and Quercetin in a Patient With Metastatic Bladder Cancer vol.95, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002598
  3. Beyond first-line systemic treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder pp.1699-3055, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-018-1935-z