Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEinerhand, Sarah MH
dc.contributor.authorBlack, Anna J
dc.contributor.authorZargar, Homayoun
dc.contributor.authorFairey, Adrian S.
dc.contributor.authorDinney, Colin P
dc.contributor.authorMir, Maria C
dc.contributor.authorKrabbe, Laura-Maria
dc.contributor.authorCookson, Michael S.
dc.contributor.authorJacobson, Niels-Erik
dc.contributor.authorMontgomery, Jeffrey S
dc.contributor.authorVasdev, Nikhil
dc.contributor.authorYu, Evan Y
dc.contributor.authorXylinas, Evanguelos
dc.contributor.authorKassouf, Wassim
dc.contributor.authorDall’Era, Marc A.
dc.contributor.authorSridhar, Srikala S.
dc.contributor.authorMcGrath, Jonathan S
dc.contributor.authorAning, Jonathan
dc.contributor.authorShariat, Shahrokh F
dc.contributor.authorWright, Jonathan L.
dc.contributor.authorThorpe, Andrew C.
dc.contributor.authorMorgan, Todd M
dc.contributor.authorHolzbeierlein, Jeff M.
dc.contributor.authorBivalacqua, Trinity J
dc.contributor.authorNorth, Scott
dc.contributor.authorBarocas, Daniel A.
dc.contributor.authorLotan, Yair
dc.contributor.authorGrivas, Petros
dc.contributor.authorGarcia, Jorge A
dc.contributor.authorStephenson, Andrew J
dc.contributor.authorShah, Jay B
dc.contributor.authorDaneshmand, Simak
dc.contributor.authorZargar-Shoshtari, Kamran
dc.contributor.authorSpiess, P. E.
dc.contributor.authorvan Rhijn, Bas W
dc.contributor.authorBlack, Peter C.
dc.contributor.authorMertens, L. S.
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-25T13:30:02Z
dc.date.available2022-10-25T13:30:02Z
dc.date.issued2022-09-28
dc.identifier.citationEinerhand , S MH , Black , A J , Zargar , H , Fairey , A S , Dinney , C P , Mir , M C , Krabbe , L-M , Cookson , M S , Jacobson , N-E , Montgomery , J S , Vasdev , N , Yu , E Y , Xylinas , E , Kassouf , W , Dall’Era , M A , Sridhar , S S , McGrath , J S , Aning , J , Shariat , S F , Wright , J L , Thorpe , A C , Morgan , T M , Holzbeierlein , J M , Bivalacqua , T J , North , S , Barocas , D A , Lotan , Y , Grivas , P , Garcia , J A , Stephenson , A J , Shah , J B , Daneshmand , S , Zargar-Shoshtari , K , Spiess , P E , van Rhijn , B W , Black , P C & Mertens , L S 2022 , ' Multicenter Evaluation of Neoadjuvant and Induction Gemcitabine-Carboplatin versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin Followed by Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer ' , World Journal of Urology . https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04160-7
dc.identifier.issn0724-4983
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/25839
dc.description© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. This is the accepted manuscript version of an article which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04160-7
dc.description.abstractPurposeCisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy (RC) is recommended in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, up to 50% of patients are cisplatin-ineligible. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes after ≥3 cycles of preoperative gemcitabine-carboplatin (gem-carbo) versus gemcitabine-cisplatin (gem-cis).  Methods We identified 1865 patients treated at 19 centers between 2000 and 2013. Patients were included if they had received ≥3 cycles of neoadjuvant (cT2-4aN0M0) or induction (cTanyN+M0) gem-carbo or gem-cis followed by RC. Results We included 747 patients treated with gem-carbo (n=147) or gem-cis (n=600). Patients treated with gem carbo had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (p=0.016) and more clinically node-positive disease (32% 88 versus 20%; p=0.013). The complete pathological response (pCR; ypT0N0) rate did not significantly differ between gem-carbo and gem-cis (20.7% versus 22.1%; p=0.73). Chemotherapeutic regimen was not significantly associated with pCR (OR: 0.99 [95%CI, 0.61-1.59]; p=0.96), overall survival (OS) (HR: 1.20 91 [95%CI, 0.85-1.67]; p=0.31), or cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR: 1.35 [95%CI, 0.93-1.96]; p=0.11). Median  OS of patients treated with gem-carbo and gem-cis was 28.6 months (95%CI 18.1-39.1) and 45.1 months (95%CI 32.7-57.6)(p=0.18), respectively. Median CSS of patients treated with gem-carbo and gem-cis was 28.8 months (95%CI 9.8-47.8) and 71.0 months (95%CI median not reached)(p=0.02), respectively. Subanalyses of the neoadjuvant and induction setting did not show significant survival differences. 4 Conclusion Our results show that a subset of cisplatin-ineligible patients with MIBC achieve pCR on gem-carbo and that survival outcomes seem comparable to gem-cis provided patients are able to receive ≥3 cycles and undergo RC.en
dc.format.extent233175
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofWorld Journal of Urology
dc.titleMulticenter Evaluation of Neoadjuvant and Induction Gemcitabine-Carboplatin versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin Followed by Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Canceren
dc.contributor.institutionCentre for Health Services and Clinical Research
dc.contributor.institutionBasic and Clinical Science Unit
dc.contributor.institutionExtracellular Vesicle Research Unit
dc.contributor.institutionSchool of Life and Medical Sciences
dc.contributor.institutionDepartment of Clinical, Pharmaceutical and Biological Science
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
dc.date.embargoedUntil2023-09-28
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1007/s00345-022-04160-7
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record