From the Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus; Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev, Denmark; Northern Centre for Cancer Treatment, Newcastle General Hospital, Newcastle; St Bartholomews Hospital, London, United Kingdom; University of Torino, St Luigi Hospital, Orbassano; Santa Chiara Hospital, Pisa, Italy; The Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada; National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary; Department of Urology, Bonn University, Bonn; Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt; Klinikum Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen, Germany; Centre Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France; Hospital Ciudad De Jaen, Jaen, Spain; Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; and Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN.
J Clin Oncol. 2023 Aug 10;41(23):3881-3890. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.02763.
Gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) and methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) were compared in patients with locally advanced or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urothelium.
Patients with stage IV TCC and no prior systemic chemotherapy were randomized to GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m days 1, 8, and 15; cisplatin 70 mg/m day 2) or standard MVAC every 28 days for a maximum of six cycles.
Four hundred five patients were randomized (GC, n = 203; MVAC, n = 202). The groups were well-balanced with respect to prognostic factors. Overall survival was similar on both arms (hazards ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.32; = .75), as were time to progressive disease (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.30), time to treatment failure (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.10), and response rate (GC, 49%; MVAC, 46%). More GC patients completed six cycles of therapy, with fewer dose adjustments. The toxic death rate was 1% on the GC arm and 3% on the MVAC arm. More GC than MVAC patients had grade 3/4 anemia (27% 18%, respectively) and thrombocytopenia (57% 21%, respectively). On both arms, the RBC transfusion rate was 13 of 100 cycles and grade 3/4 hemorrhage or hematuria was 2%; the platelet transfusion rate was four patients per 100 cycles and two patients per 100 cycles on GC and MVAC, respectively. More MVAC patients, compared with GC patients, had grade 3/4 neutropenia (82% 71%, respectively), neutropenic fever (14% 2%, respectively), neutropenic sepsis (12% 1%, respectively), and grade 3/4 mucositis (22% 1%, respectively) and alopecia (55% 11%, respectively). Quality of life was maintained during treatment on both arms; however, more patients on GC fared better regarding weight, performance status, and fatigue.
GC provides a similar survival advantage to MVAC with a better safety profile and tolerability. This better-risk benefit ratio should change the standard of care for patients with locally advanced and metastatic TCC from MVAC to GC.
吉西他滨联合顺铂(GC)与甲氨蝶呤、长春碱、多柔比星和顺铂(MVAC)在局部晚期或转移性尿路上皮移行细胞癌(TCC)患者中进行了比较。
无既往全身化疗的 IV 期 TCC 患者被随机分配至 GC 组(吉西他滨 1000mg/m2,第 1、8 和 15 天;顺铂 70mg/m2,第 2 天)或标准 MVAC 组,每 28 天为一个周期,最多进行六个周期。
405 例患者被随机分组(GC 组 203 例,MVAC 组 202 例)。两组在预后因素方面具有良好的均衡性。两组的总生存期相似(风险比 [HR],1.04;95%置信区间 [CI],0.82 至 1.32;=0.75),疾病进展时间(HR,1.05;95%CI,0.85 至 1.30)、治疗失败时间(HR,0.89;95%CI,0.72 至 1.10)和缓解率(GC 组 49%,MVAC 组 46%)也相似。GC 组有更多患者完成了六个周期的治疗,剂量调整也较少。GC 臂的毒副反应致死率为 1%,MVAC 臂为 3%。GC 组较 MVAC 组有更多的患者出现 3/4 级贫血(分别为 27%和 18%)和血小板减少症(分别为 57%和 21%)。在两个治疗组中,RBC 输血率均为每 100 个周期 13 次,3/4 级出血或血尿的发生率均为 2%;血小板输注率分别为每 100 个周期 4 例和 2 例,GC 组和 MVAC 组各 2 例。与 GC 组相比,MVAC 组有更多的患者出现 3/4 级中性粒细胞减少症(分别为 82%和 71%)、中性粒细胞减少症发热(分别为 14%和 2%)、中性粒细胞减少症败血症(分别为 12%和 1%)和 3/4 级粘膜炎(分别为 22%和 1%)和脱发(分别为 55%和 11%)。两组在治疗期间的生活质量均得到维持;然而,GC 组更多患者在体重、表现状态和疲劳方面的情况更好。
GC 与 MVAC 相比提供了相似的生存优势,且具有更好的安全性和耐受性。这种更好的风险效益比应该改变局部晚期和转移性 TCC 患者的治疗标准,从 MVAC 改为 GC。