Salvage chemotherapy with paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and nedaplatin in patients with urothelial cancer who had received prior cisplatin-based therapy

Pre-first-line chemotherapy risk stratification for overall survival in advanced urothelial carcinoma in sequential therapy era

PURPOSE

To explore pre-treatment risk factors for overall survival (OS) in advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) patients treated with first-line (1L) chemotherapy in sequential therapy (ST) era. Additionally, to evaluate the proportion of patients who were not able to undergo subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy according to the subgroups stratified by the risk factors.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study was conducted. Metastatic or locally advanced UC patients treated between 2017 and 2022 were included. The Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test and multivariate Cox regression models were used to address OS.

RESULTS

Three hundred and fourteen patients treated with 1L chemotherapy were included in the study and 57 (18.2%) patients were not able to proceed to subsequent ICI therapy. Pre-chemotherapy risk factors for OS in 314 patients were ECOG-PS 1 or more, having no primary site resection, C-reactive protein (CRP) level of 3 mg/dL or more, and non-cisplatin-based regimen. Patients having 3 or 4 risk factors had higher risk for not being able to receive ST (Mann-Whitney U test, P < 0.001). As risk factors for OS in 230 patients who were able to receive ST, having no primary site resection, a neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio of 3 or more, and the presence of liver metastasis were identified.

CONCLUSION

We reported the risk factors for OS in advanced UC patients treated with 1L chemotherapy in ST era. Patients with high risk for OS may not be able to proceed to subsequent ICI therapy even in the ST era.

Outcome of maintenance systemic chemotherapy with drug-free interval for metastatic urothelial carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

Aiming to achieve long-term disease control, maintenance systemic chemotherapy (MSC) with a 1-3-month drug-free interval is continued in selected patients. We report our experience of MSC for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC).

METHODS

Of 228 metastatic UC patients treated with systemic chemotherapy, 40 (17.5%, 40/228) had continuously undergone MSC. Data on the regimen, cycle number, and reason for the discontinuation of MSC were also collected. We analyzed OS from the initiation of MSC until death or the last follow-up, using the log-rank test to assess the significance of differences.

RESULTS

The median number of cycles of chemotherapy was 6, and the responses were CR in 6, PR in 20, SD in 13, and PD in 1 before MSC. Gemcitabine plus CDDP or carboplatin was mainly performed as MSC (70%, 28/40). MSC was repeated quarterly in 30 (75%, 30/40), every two months in 8 (20%, 8/40), and with other intervals in 2 (5%, 2/40). Overall, a median of 3.5 cycles (range: 1-29) of MSC was performed. The reason for the discontinuation of MSC was PD in 24 (60%, 24/40), favorable disease control in 9 (22.5%, 9/40), and myelosuppression in 3 (7.5%, 3/40), and for other reasons in 2 (5%, 2/40). MSC was ongoing in 2 (5%, 2/40). The median OS was 27 months from the initiation of MSC. PS0 (P = 0.0169), the absence of lung metastasis (P = 0.0387), and resection of the primary site (P = 0.0495) were associated with long-term survival after MSC.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients, long-term systemic chemotherapy could be performed with a drug-free interval. Our maintenance strategy with cytotoxic drugs may become one of the treatment options for long-term disease control.

Changes in renal function following nedaplatin-containing chemotherapy in patients with urothelial carcinoma unfit for cisplatin

The present study evaluated the impact of nedaplatin-containing chemotherapy on renal function in 35 patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC) between 2001 and 2014 who were unfit for cisplatin treatment. As comparative controls, the present study also examined 35 patients with the same disease who underwent cisplatin-containing chemotherapy during the same period. The changes in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) prior to and following the administration of nedaplatin during each cycle of chemotherapy was investigated. The present study also reported the overall response rates and adverse events in each group. A total of 31 cycles of the gemcitabine/nedaplatin regimen and 66 cycles of the methotrexate/epirubicin/nedaplatin regimen were administered. In the nedaplatin group, the mean eGFRs prior to and following chemotherapy were 45.4 and 47.8 ml/min/1.73 m², respectively. The eGFR of the post-chemotherapy group was significantly increased (P<0.001). On the other hand, in the cisplatin group, the eGFR following chemotherapy was significantly lower than the rate prior to chemotherapy (P<0.001). The overall response rates were 30.4 and 66.7% in the nedaplatin and cisplatin groups, respectively. In the two groups, myelosuppression was the most common side effect, but the occurrence rates in both groups were similar, and these adverse events were manageable. With regard to nephrotoxicity, nedaplatin-containing chemotherapy for cisplatin-unfit patients with UC is a safe treatment modality.

Outcome and prognostic factors in metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients receiving second-line chemotherapy: an analysis of real-world clinical practice data in Japan

Objectives

The objective of the present study was to investigate the survival outcome and prognostic factors of metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients treated with second-line systemic chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice.

Methods

Overall, 114 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma undergoing second-line systemic chemotherapy were included in this retrospective analysis. The dominant second-line chemotherapy was a paclitaxel-based combination regimen (60%, 68/114). We assessed the progression-free survival and overall survival times using the Kaplan–Meier method. The Cox proportional hazards model was applied to identify the factors affecting overall survival.

Results

The median progression-free survival and overall survival times were 4 and 9 months, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score greater than 0 at presentation, C-reactive protein level ≧1 mg/dl and poor response to prior chemotherapy were adverse prognostic indicators. Patients with 0, 1, 2 and 3 of those risk factors had a median overall survival of 17, 12, 7 and 3 months, respectively.

Conclusions

The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at presentation, C-reactive protein level and response to prior chemotherapy were prognostic factors for metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients undergoing second-line chemotherapy. In the future, this information might help guide the choice of salvage treatment, such as second-line chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors, after the failure of first-line chemotherapy.

Role of surgical consolidation in metastatic urothelial carcinoma

Since the development of systemic combination chemotherapy, postchemotherapy extirpation has been performed in selected patients mainly with locally advanced and/or initially unresectable bladder cancer, and, in very selected patients, surgical consolidation for visceral metastases has also been performed. The purpose of this article was to review and summarize the current evidence for the role of surgical consolidation in metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Outcome of metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated by systemic chemotherapy: Prognostic factors based on real-world clinical practice in Japan

AIM

To clarify prognostic factors of metatstatic urothelial carcinoma treated by systemic chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice in the Japanese population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 228 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma undergoing systemic chemotherapy between 2000 and 2013 were included in the present multi-institutional study. The gemcitabine plus cisplatin regimen was administered as first-line chemotherapy to 131 patients, whereas methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin or its modified regimen was given to 71 patients. Of the 228 patients, 119 received at least 2 different regimens and 22 underwent resection of metastases (metastasectomy). Multivariate survival analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. The characteristics included were age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS), primary site, pathology of primary site, hemoglobin levels, lactate dehydrogenase levels, C-reactive protein levels, corrected calcium levels, estimated glomerular filtration rate levels, history of prior chemotherapy, metastatic sites, resection of primary site, number of metastatic organs, and metastasectomy.

RESULTS

The median overall survival (OS) time was 17 months. On multivariate analysis, female sex, good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS at presentation, hemoglobin level≥10g/dl, and single organ metastasis were significant independent predictors of prolonged OS. For the survival effect of metastasectomy, the median OS time of the 22 patients with metastasectomy was 53 months, which was significantly longer when compared with patients not undergoing metastasectomy (15mo). After adjustment for the 4 aforementioned prognostic factors, metastasectomy still remained significant (hazard ratio: 0.364, P = 0.0008).

CONCLUSIONS

Female sex, more favorable PS at presentation, hemoglobin level>10g/dl, and single organ metastasis were favorable prognostic factors. In addition, metastasectomy was associated with long-term disease control.

Nedaplatin: a cisplatin derivative in cancer chemotherapy

Nedaplatin, a cisplatin analog, has been developed to decrease the toxicities induced by cisplatin, such as nephrotoxicity and gastrointestinal toxicity. The dose of nedaplatin is determined by body surface area, not by the area under the curve (AUC). The recommended therapeutic dose is 80–100 mg/m², although the pharmacokinetic profile of nedaplatin is similar to that of carboplatin. In our preliminary study, there was a favorable correlation between AUC and creatinine clearance (CL), suggesting that renal function should be considered when nedaplatin is administered. Ishibashi’s formula, ie, Dose_NDP = AUC × CL_NDP, where CL_NDP = 0.0738 × creatinine clearance + 4.47, would be predictable and useful for estimating the individual dose of nedaplatin. Several Phase II studies have suggested that nedaplatin might be a useful second analog, especially for patients with non-small cell lung cancer, esophageal cancer, uterine cervical cancer, head and neck cancer, or urothelial cancer. Further, nedaplatin was reported to be a useful chemotherapeutic agent with radiosensitizing properties; however, there is no Phase III study of nedaplatin, neither with chemotherapy nor with concurrent chemoradiotherapy, because nedaplatin is not commonly used throughout the world. Further evaluation in a randomized controlled trial is warranted to demonstrate definitively the activity of nedaplatin.

Use of low-dose combined therapy with gemcitabine and paclitaxel for advanced urothelial cancer patients with resistance to cisplatin-containing therapy: a retrospective analysis

Purpose

The prognosis of patients with advanced and recurrent urothelial cancer (UC) is poor. Although cisplatin (CDDP)-containing chemotherapy is the most effective regimen in these patients, there is no other established chemotherapeutic regimen. We administered combination therapy with low-dose gemcitabine (GEM) and paclitaxel (PTX), named low-dose gemcitabine–paclitaxel (LD-GP) therapy, as salvage therapy for these patients. The aim was to evaluate the anti-tumoral effects, relief of pain, and toxicity of LD-GP therapy in patients with resistance to CDDP-containing therapy.

Patients and methods

Thirty-five patients with advanced UC, previously treated with CDDP-containing regimens, were treated with LD-GP therapy (GEM, 700 mg/m² + PTX, 70 mg/m² on day 1 and 8, repeated every 28 days). Pain was measured on a visual analog scale before and after treatment. Pain relief and survival were compared between this and other treatment regimens.

Results

None of the patients had complete response to LD-GP therapy. Partial response and stable disease were seen in 25.7 and 62.9 % of patients, respectively. Kaplan–Meier curves showed better survival in patients with LD-GP therapy than with others (p = 0.034). Twenty-eight patients (80.0 %) had adequate pain relief, and only two patients needed to increase their analgesics. Other regimens demonstrated pain relief in 30.4 % of patients. Common toxicities included leukopenia, with five patients requiring granular colony-stimulating factor therapy (14.3 %). The most common non-hematologic toxicity was fatigue (n = 7, 17.1 %).

Conclusions

LD-GP therapy is feasible and well tolerated as salvage therapy in patients with advanced UC with resistance to CDDP-containing therapy.

Current chemotherapeutic strategies against bladder cancer

Urothelial cancer is a chemotherapy-sensitive malignancy, with the regimen of methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (M-VAC) until recently considered to be the first choice for chemotherapy. Poor survival and substantial toxicity associated with M-VAC have led to investigations into alternative chemotherapy strategies, and the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) may be promising. In addition, combination chemotherapy of taxanes along with gemcitabine and/or platinum-based agents is also considered to provide clinical benefits as second-line chemotherapy following M-VAC or GC therapy. In the near future, results of trials using molecular target therapies may bring improved outcomes for patients with bladder cancer.

Paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and nedaplatin as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a phase II study of the SUOC group

There is no standard second-line chemotherapy treatment for recurrent or metastatic urothelial cancer (MUC). The purpose of this phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the three-drug combination of paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and nedaplatin (TIN). Patients with MUC were eligible after treatment failure with methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin, or gemcitabine and cisplatin. Doses for TIN therapy were paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 on day 1, ifosfamide 1500 mg/m2 on days 1-3, and nedaplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1, every 4 weeks. Tumor response, the primary efficacy parameter, was assessed according to unidimensional measurements (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, version 1.0). Secondary efficacy parameters were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Toxicity was assessed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, version 3.0. A total of 45 patients (13 females and 32 males) with MUC were evaluable for response and toxicity. The overall response rate was 40.0%. Median PFS time was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6-11.6). Median OS time was 8.9 months (95% CI, 10.5-18.9). Grade 3 or 4 hematologic adverse events were neutropenia (95.6%), anemia (15.6%), and thrombocytopenia (17.8%). The most common grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic adverse events were anorexia (4.4%) and elevated aspartate transaminase/alanine transaminase (2.2%). No toxic death was observed. The main limitation of this study is that only 10 patients (22.2%) who were previously treated with gemcitabine and cisplatin were included. In conclusion, TIN as second-line treatment for MUC is an active regimen with a manageable toxicity profile.

Weekly Paclitaxel and Carboplatin against Advanced Transitional Cell Cancer after Failure of a Platinum-Based Regimen

OBJECTIVE

Weekly administration of paclitaxel plus carboplatin is hypothesized to be an effective second-line treatment for advanced transitional cell cancer after failure of platinum-based regimen. In this phase 2 trial, we tested this hypothesis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with advanced transitional cell cancer who showed evidence of progressive or recurrent disease after methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) therapy were eligible for this study. Weekly paclitaxel (80mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (AUC 2) were administered on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, and 36; the cycle was repeated every 7 wk until disease progression or intolerable toxicity (maximum 18 doses).

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients entered this study. Among the 31 patients who were assessable, 10 had an objective response (overall response rate: 32.3%, 95% confidence interval, 15.8-48.7%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median survival times were 3.7 and 7.9 mo, respectively. Among the 22 patients who received prior MVAC therapy for metastatic disease, 36% had an objective response; their median PFS and median survival times were 4.3 and 7.9 mo, respectively; neither survival time significantly differed from the survival time of those who received prior MVAC as adjuvant setting. Toxicities were mild except one toxic death due to neutropenic sepsis.

CONCLUSIONS

Weekly paclitaxel plus carboplatin was a manageable, active second-line treatment for advanced transitional cell cancer after failure of platinum-based therapy.

Impact of multimodal treatment on survival in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer

OBJECTIVES

Systemic combination chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer. Although initial response rates are 50-70%, these responses are usually transient. The present study investigated the impact of multimodal treatment including metastasectomy on survival in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer.

METHODS

Between 1989 and 2005, 48 patients with metastatic urothelial cancer underwent systemic chemotherapy at our institution. The majority received conventional cisplatin-based chemotherapy, whereas some patients underwent novel chemotherapeutic regimens mainly as salvage therapy with or without resection of metastases, aiming to improve the outcome. The relationship between clinical characteristics and survival was analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. The characteristics analyzed were sex, age, primary site, prior systemic chemotherapy, histology of primary lesion, white blood cell counts, hemoglobin levels, metastatic sites, total number of chemotherapy courses, and resection of the primary lesion and metastasis.

RESULTS

Median survival-time was 17 mo (95% confidence interval, 9-27 mo) for all 48 patients. Using a multivariate model, five or more chemotherapy cycles (p=0.0022), absence of liver, bone, and local recurrence (p=0.0146), and resection of metastasis (p=0.0006) were independent significant predictors of prolonged survival. Median survival time in the 12 patients with metastasectomy was 42 mo, which was significantly longer than that of patients who did not undergo metastasectomy (10 mo).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of chemotherapy cycles, sites of metastasis, and metastasectomy had an impact on survival. In selected patients, a multimodal approach including metastasectomy may contribute to long-term disease control.