26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Neoadjuvant Dose-Dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin With Pegfilgrastim Support in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Cancer: Pathologic, Radiologic, and Biomarker Correlates

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          In advanced urothelial cancer, treatment with dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (ddMVAC) results in a high response rate, less toxicity, and few dosing delays. We explored the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant ddMVAC with pegfilgrastim support in muscle-invasive urothelial cancer (MIUC).

          Patients and Methods

          Patients with cT2-cT4, N0-1, M0 MIUC were enrolled. Four cycles of ddMVAC were administered, followed by radical cystectomy. The primary end point was pathologic response (PaR) defined by pathologic downstaging to ≤ pT1N0M0. The study used Simon's optimal two-stage design to evaluate null and alternative hypotheses of PaR rate of 35% versus 55%. Secondary end points included toxicity, disease-free survival (DFS), radiologic response (RaR), and biomarker correlates, including ERCC1.

          Results

          Between December 2008 and April 2012, 39 patients (cT2N0, 33%; cT3N0, 18%; cT4N0, 3%; cT2-4N1, 43%; unspecified, 3%) were enrolled. Median follow-up was 2 years. Overall, 49% (80% CI, 38 to 61) achieved PaR of ≤ pT1N0M0, and we concluded this regimen was effective. High-grade (grade ≥ 3) toxicities were observed in 10% of patients, with no neutropenic fevers or treatment-related death. One-year DFS was 89% versus 67% for patients who achieved PaR compared with those who did not (hazard ratio [HR], 2.6; 95% CI, 0.8 to 8.1; P = .08) and 86% versus 62% for patients who achieved RaR compared with those who did not (HR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 12.5; P = .009). We found no association between serum tumor markers or ERCC1 expression with response or survival.

          Conclusion

          In patients with MIUC, neoadjuvant ddMVAC was well tolerated and resulted in significant pathologic and radiologic downstaging.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          J Clin Oncol
          J. Clin. Oncol
          jco
          jco
          JCO
          Journal of Clinical Oncology
          American Society of Clinical Oncology
          0732-183X
          1527-7755
          20 June 2014
          12 May 2014
          12 May 2014
          : 32
          : 18
          : 1889-1894
          Affiliations
          [1]Toni K. Choueiri, Susanna Jacobus, Joaquim Bellmunt, Angela Qu, Edward C. Stack, Sabina Signoretti, Meghara Walsh, Graeme Steele, Michelle Hirsch, Christopher J. Sweeney, Mary-Ellen Taplin, Adam S. Kibel, Katherine M. Krajewski, Philip W. Kantoff, Robert W. Ross, and Jonathan E. Rosenberg, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital; Christopher Tretter, Lahey Clinic, Burlington; Glenn J. Bubley, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA; Leonard J. Appleman, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; and Jonathan E. Rosenberg, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
          Author notes
          Corresponding author: Toni K. Choueiri, MD, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA 02115; e-mail: toni_choueiri@ 123456dfci.harvard.edu .
          Article
          PMC7057274 PMC7057274 7057274 24785
          10.1200/JCO.2013.52.4785
          7057274
          24821883
          163dfcc8-c144-4edb-aba8-4be59f2e4dff
          © 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
          History
          Categories
          FRA, French Translations
          ORIGINAL REPORTS
          Urologic Oncology

          Comments

          Comment on this article

          scite_
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Smart Citations
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
          View Citations

          See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

          scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

          Similar content407

          Cited by74