Shelley Mike, Cleves Anne, Wilt Timothy J, Mason Malcolm
Cochrane Prostatic Diseases and Urological Cancers Unit, Research Dept, Velindre NHS Trust, Velindre Road, Whitchurch, Cardiff, Wales, UK, CF4 7XL.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Apr 13(4):CD008976. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008976.pub2.
The prognosis for unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder is poor with most patients succumbing to their disease within 2 to 3 years. Clinical management at this stage of the disease is palliative with systemic chemotherapy the main treatment of choice. A number of cytotoxic agents have shown activity in metastatic disease including cisplatin, methotrexate, doxorubicin and vinblastine. However, response rates still need improving and toxicities may sometimes be severe, and so the search for newer agents with improved benefit-to-risk ratios is constantly being pursued. One such agent that shows promise is gemcitabine.
Evaluate the effectiveness and toxicity of gemcitabine for the management of unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer.
A search strategy was developed for MEDLINE to identify randomised trials of gemcitabine for the treatment of unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer. The searches were from 1966 to July 2010. Other databases searched included EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, LILACS, and the Web of Science®. There were no language or location restrictions.
The titles and abstracts of the combined electronic and hand searching searches were manually screened by two authors to determine if they met the inclusion criteria of this review. Studies were selected if they were randomised, controlled trials or quasi-randomised clinical trials that included gemcitabine in at least one arm of a comparative study.
Data extraction was carried out in duplicate by two authors. The information retrieved included the author's details, the study design, the characteristics of the recruited patients, details of the interventions and data relating to the primary and secondary outcomes measures.
Three randomised trials used gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GCis) as one of the arms in each trial. The first randomised trial compared GCis with MVAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin) and showed no significant difference in overall survival (hazard ratio1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.34, P = 0.443) however the GCis regime had fewer incidences of neutropenic sepsis (1% versus 12%, P = 0.001) and mucositis (1% versus 22%, P = 0.001). A second randomised trial compared GCis to gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCarbo) and reported an improved, but non-significant 1-year survival rate with GCis (64% versus 37%). A third randomised trial compared GCis with gemcitabine plus cisplatin plus paclitaxel (GCisPac) and again found no significant difference in overall survival (respective medians 49 weeks versus 61 weeks).One randomised trial evaluated GCarbo against methotrexate plus carboplatin plus vinblastine (MCarboV) in patients "unfit" for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. There were more overall responses (38% versus 20%) and less severe acute toxicities (14% versus 23%) with GCarbo.In one randomised study evaluating 3-weekly gemcitabine plus paclitaxel (GPac3) versus a 2-weekly regimen overall survival was not significantly different (respective medians 13 and 9 months) however toxicities were worse with GPac3 especially alopecia (76% versus 32%).A larger trial compared gemcitabine (1 g/m(2)) (grams per metre squared) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) (milligrams per metre squared) as a 3-weekly schedule for 6 cycles with a 2-weekly maintenance schedule. There was no significant difference in response rates, progression-free survival, disease-specific survival, and overall survival.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: A review of the published evidence found that one trial reported gemcitabine plus cisplatin had a better safety profile than MVAC and may be considered the first choice for treatment of metastatic bladder cancer. However, the data are limited to one trial only. Patients unable to tolerate cisplatin may benefit from gemcitabine plus carboplatin.
无法切除的局部晚期或转移性膀胱移行细胞癌预后较差,大多数患者在2至3年内死于该病。疾病在此阶段的临床管理以姑息治疗为主,全身化疗是主要的治疗选择。多种细胞毒性药物在转移性疾病中显示出活性,包括顺铂、甲氨蝶呤、阿霉素和长春碱。然而,缓解率仍有待提高,且毒性有时可能很严重,因此一直在寻找具有更好效益风险比的新型药物。吉西他滨就是一种显示出前景的药物。
评估吉西他滨治疗无法切除的局部晚期或转移性膀胱癌的有效性和毒性。
制定了针对MEDLINE的检索策略,以识别吉西他滨治疗无法切除的局部晚期或转移性膀胱癌的随机试验。检索时间为1966年至2010年7月。检索的其他数据库包括EMBASE、CINAHL、Cochrane系统评价数据库、LILACS和科学网®。没有语言或地域限制。
两名作者对电子检索和手工检索相结合的标题和摘要进行人工筛选,以确定它们是否符合本综述的纳入标准。如果研究是随机对照试验或半随机临床试验,且在比较研究的至少一个组中包含吉西他滨,则选择该研究。
两名作者重复进行数据提取。检索到的信息包括作者详细信息、研究设计、招募患者的特征、干预细节以及与主要和次要结局指标相关的数据。
三项随机试验在每个试验中均将吉西他滨加顺铂(GCis)作为其中一组。第一项随机试验将GCis与MVAC(甲氨蝶呤、长春碱、阿霉素和顺铂)进行比较,结果显示总生存期无显著差异(风险比1.09,95%可信区间0.88至1.34,P = 0.443),然而GCis方案的中性粒细胞减少性败血症发生率较低(1%对12%,P = 0.001),黏膜炎发生率也较低(1%对22%,P = 0.001)。第二项随机试验将GCis与吉西他滨加卡铂(GCarbo)进行比较,报告GCis的1年生存率有所提高,但无显著差异(64%对37%)。第三项随机试验将GCis与吉西他滨加顺铂加紫杉醇(GCisPac)进行比较,同样发现总生存期无显著差异(各自的中位数为49周对61周)。一项随机试验评估了GCarbo与甲氨蝶呤加卡铂加长春碱(MCarboV)在“不适合”基于顺铂化疗的患者中的疗效。GCarbo的总体缓解率更高(38%对20%),严重急性毒性更低(14%对23%)。在一项评估每3周一次的吉西他滨加紫杉醇(GPac3)与每2周一次方案的随机研究中,总生存期无显著差异(各自的中位数为13个月和9个月),然而GPac3的毒性更严重,尤其是脱发(76%对32%)。一项更大规模的试验比较了吉西他滨(1 g/m²)(每平方米克数)加紫杉醇(175 mg/m²)(每平方米毫克数)每3周一次给药6个周期并联合每2周一次维持方案的疗效。缓解率、无进展生存期、疾病特异性生存期和总生存期均无显著差异。
对已发表证据的综述发现,一项试验报告吉西他滨加顺铂的安全性优于MVAC,可能被认为是转移性膀胱癌治疗的首选。然而,数据仅局限于一项试验。无法耐受顺铂的患者可能从吉西他滨加卡铂中获益。