Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2012 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | International Braz J Urol (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382012000100007 |
Resumo: | PURPOSE: Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin is the accepted treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (days 1, 8) and carboplatin AUC-4.5 (day 1) were given every 21 days to 23 patients with creatinine clearance < 60 mL/min, cardiac ejection fraction < 45% or active ischemia. Patient characteristics included: median age 73 (56-86) years; primary site: bladder 17 (73%), upper tract 6 (27%) patients; Bajorin's prognostic groups: good 6 (26%), intermediate 11 (48%) and poor 6 (26%) patients. Data was retrospectively documented. Patients were followed until they expired. RESULTS: We obtained objective responses in 8 (34.7%) patients, (95% CI, 16.3-57.2%), including one patient with complete response. The median progression-free survival was 4 (0.2-16.5+) months and the overall survival 8.6 (0.2-45.3+) months. At time of analysis, 4 patients (17%) remained disease free; 3 of them underwent resection of residual disease. Toxicity included: infection in 9 (39%) patients; among them, one died from pneumonia; bleeding > grade 2 in 3 (13%) patients and fatigue grade 3 in 2 (9%) patients. Hematologic toxicity included grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 2 (9%) patients and grade 4 neutropenia in 3 (13%) patients. Five (22%) patients discontinued therapy due to toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin demonstrated clinical activity in patients with advanced urothelial cancer unfit for cisplatin. It was associated with considerable toxicity. Resection of residual disease is feasible in this population. |
id |
SBU-1_e59d07597a475d03f48fbb19eb70ff89 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1677-55382012000100007 |
network_acronym_str |
SBU-1 |
network_name_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac functionkidneyneoplasmstransitional cell carcinomaneoplasm metastasiscarboplatinPURPOSE: Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin is the accepted treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (days 1, 8) and carboplatin AUC-4.5 (day 1) were given every 21 days to 23 patients with creatinine clearance < 60 mL/min, cardiac ejection fraction < 45% or active ischemia. Patient characteristics included: median age 73 (56-86) years; primary site: bladder 17 (73%), upper tract 6 (27%) patients; Bajorin's prognostic groups: good 6 (26%), intermediate 11 (48%) and poor 6 (26%) patients. Data was retrospectively documented. Patients were followed until they expired. RESULTS: We obtained objective responses in 8 (34.7%) patients, (95% CI, 16.3-57.2%), including one patient with complete response. The median progression-free survival was 4 (0.2-16.5+) months and the overall survival 8.6 (0.2-45.3+) months. At time of analysis, 4 patients (17%) remained disease free; 3 of them underwent resection of residual disease. Toxicity included: infection in 9 (39%) patients; among them, one died from pneumonia; bleeding > grade 2 in 3 (13%) patients and fatigue grade 3 in 2 (9%) patients. Hematologic toxicity included grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 2 (9%) patients and grade 4 neutropenia in 3 (13%) patients. Five (22%) patients discontinued therapy due to toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin demonstrated clinical activity in patients with advanced urothelial cancer unfit for cisplatin. It was associated with considerable toxicity. Resection of residual disease is feasible in this population.Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2012-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382012000100007International braz j urol v.38 n.1 2012reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/S1677-55382012000100007info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSella,AvishayKovel,Svetlanaeng2012-03-28T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382012000100007Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2012-03-28T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function |
title |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function |
spellingShingle |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function Sella,Avishay kidney neoplasms transitional cell carcinoma neoplasm metastasis carboplatin |
title_short |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function |
title_full |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function |
title_fullStr |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function |
title_full_unstemmed |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function |
title_sort |
Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin in urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin due to impaired renal or cardiac function |
author |
Sella,Avishay |
author_facet |
Sella,Avishay Kovel,Svetlana |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Kovel,Svetlana |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Sella,Avishay Kovel,Svetlana |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
kidney neoplasms transitional cell carcinoma neoplasm metastasis carboplatin |
topic |
kidney neoplasms transitional cell carcinoma neoplasm metastasis carboplatin |
description |
PURPOSE: Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin is the accepted treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer patients unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (days 1, 8) and carboplatin AUC-4.5 (day 1) were given every 21 days to 23 patients with creatinine clearance < 60 mL/min, cardiac ejection fraction < 45% or active ischemia. Patient characteristics included: median age 73 (56-86) years; primary site: bladder 17 (73%), upper tract 6 (27%) patients; Bajorin's prognostic groups: good 6 (26%), intermediate 11 (48%) and poor 6 (26%) patients. Data was retrospectively documented. Patients were followed until they expired. RESULTS: We obtained objective responses in 8 (34.7%) patients, (95% CI, 16.3-57.2%), including one patient with complete response. The median progression-free survival was 4 (0.2-16.5+) months and the overall survival 8.6 (0.2-45.3+) months. At time of analysis, 4 patients (17%) remained disease free; 3 of them underwent resection of residual disease. Toxicity included: infection in 9 (39%) patients; among them, one died from pneumonia; bleeding > grade 2 in 3 (13%) patients and fatigue grade 3 in 2 (9%) patients. Hematologic toxicity included grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 2 (9%) patients and grade 4 neutropenia in 3 (13%) patients. Five (22%) patients discontinued therapy due to toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin demonstrated clinical activity in patients with advanced urothelial cancer unfit for cisplatin. It was associated with considerable toxicity. Resection of residual disease is feasible in this population. |
publishDate |
2012 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2012-02-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382012000100007 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382012000100007 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S1677-55382012000100007 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
International braz j urol v.38 n.1 2012 reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online) instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) instacron:SBU |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
instacron_str |
SBU |
institution |
SBU |
reponame_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
collection |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br |
_version_ |
1750318072431902720 |