Gemcitabine and ifosfamide as a second-line treatment for cisplatin-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a phase II study

Risk for Arterial Thromboembolic Events (ATEs) in Patients with Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer (aUTC) Treated with First-Line Chemotherapy: Single-Center, Observational Study

Arterial thromboembolism has been associated with cancer or its treatment. Unlike venous thromboembolism, the incidence and risk factors have not been extensively studied. Here, we investigated the incidence of arterial thromboembolic events (ATEs) in an institutional series of advanced urinary tract cancer (aUTC) treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy. The ATE definition included peripheral arterial embolism/thrombosis, ischemic stroke and coronary events. A total of 354 aUTC patients were analyzed. Most patients (95.2%) received platinum-based chemotherapy. A total of 12 patients (3.4%) suffered an ATE within a median time of 3.6 months from the start of chemotherapy. The most frequent ATE was ischemic stroke (n = 7). Two ATEs were fatal. The 6-month and 24-month incidence were 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9-4.1) and 3.6% (95% CI: 1.9-6.2), respectively. Perioperative chemotherapy increased the risk for ATE by 5.55-fold. Tumors other than UTC and pure non-transitional cell carcinoma histology were also independent risk factors. No association with the type of chemotherapy was found. Overall, ATEs occur in 4.6% of aUTC patients treated with chemotherapy and represent a clinically relevant manifestation. Perioperative chemotherapy significantly increases the risk for ATE. The role of prophylaxis in high-risk groups should be prospectively studied.

[Second-line treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma : Update immuno-oncology]

The approval of the PD‑1 and PD-L1 (programmed cell death [ligand] 1) antibodies pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and atezolizumab has fundamentally changed the therapeutic landscape of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) are the standard of care in second-line treatment if not already used in first line. They replace conventional chemotherapeutics such as vinflunine, paclitaxel, or docetaxel and offer a superior toxicity profile. This article provides an overview of current second-line treatment strategies for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Risk for Venous Thromboembolic Events in Patients With Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer Treated With First-Line Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) frequently occur in cancer patients. Risk assessment models (RAMs) for cancer-associated thrombosis have been proposed. However, advanced urinary tract cancer (aUTC) was not adequately represented in these models. We studied the incidence of VTEs, the risk factors, and the applicability of recently described RAMs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from 335 patients with aUTC treated with chemotherapy between April 1995 and September 2015 in a single institution were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 95.2% received platinum-based first-line chemotherapy. Twenty-nine patients (8.7%) experienced VTEs. The 6-, 12-, and 24-month VTE incidence was 7.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8-10.6), 8.1% (95% CI, 5.4-11.5) and 9.4% (95% CI, 6.4-13.1), respectively. No significant association of VTE incidence with the Khorana risk score was observed. History of vascular event (VTE and/or arterial thromboembolic event) was significantly associated with the development of VTE. Patients with such history had a 6-, 12-, and 24-month VTE incidence of 16.2% (95% CI, 6.6-29.7), 19.2% (95% CI, 8.4-33.3), and 25.2% (95% CI, 12.5-40.1) compared to 6.2% (95% CI, 3.7-9.4), 6.6% (95% CI, 4.1-10), and 7.1% (95% CI, 4.4-10.6) of those who did not. The discriminatory ability of this factor adjusted for leucocyte count, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and type of chemotherapy reached 0.79 (95% CI, 0.71-0.87) compared to the 0.58 (95% CI, 0.49-0.66) for the Khorana risk score.

CONCLUSION

Development of tumor-specific algorithms for the risk of VTEs is advisable. Patients with aUTC and a history of vascular events are at high risk for VTE development, and prophylaxis should be prospectively studied in this group.

The Challenge of Managing Bladder Cancer and Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Review with Treatment Recommendations from the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG)

Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men and the ninth most common in women in the Western world. The management of bladder carcinoma requires a multidisciplinary approach. Optimal treatment depends on several factors, including histology, stage, patient status, and possible comorbidities. Here we review recent findings on the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma, advanced urothelial carcinoma, upper tract urothelial carcinoma, non-urothelial carcinoma, and urologic complications arising from the disease or treatment. In addition, we present the recommendations of the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group for the treatment of these diseases, based on a focused analysis of clinical management and the potential of current research, including recent findings on the potential benefit of immunotherapy. In recent years, whole-genome approaches have provided new predictive biomarkers and promising molecular targets that could lead to precision medicine in bladder cancer. Moreover, the involvement of other specialists in addition to urologists will ensure not only appropriate therapeutic decisions but also adequate follow-up for response evaluation and management of complications. It is crucial, however, to apply recent molecular findings and implement clinical guidelines as soon as possible in order to maximize therapeutic gains and improve patient prognosis.

Everolimus and pazopanib (E/P) benefit genomically selected patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is a genomically diverse disease with known alterations in the mTOR pathway and tyrosine kinases including FGFR. We investigated the efficacy and safety of combination treatment with everolimus and pazopanib (E/P) in genomically profiled patients with mUC.

METHODS

mUC patients enrolled on a Phase I dose escalation study and an expansion cohort treated with E/P were included. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR); secondary end points were safety, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients were assessed for mutations and copy number alterations in 300 relevant cancer-associated genes using next-generation sequencing and findings were correlated with outcomes. Time-to-event data were estimated with Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

Of the 23 patients enrolled overall, 19 had mUC. ORR was 21% (one complete response (CR), three partial responses (PR), eight with stable disease (SD). DOR, PFS and OS were 6.5, 3.6, and 9.1 months, respectively. Four patients with clinical benefit (one CR, two PR, one SD) had mutations in TSC1/TSC2 or mTOR and a 5th patient with PR had a FGFR3-TACC3 fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy with E/P is safe in mUC and select patients with alterations in mTOR or FGFR pathways derive significant clinical benefit.

From Clinical Trials to the Front Line: Vinflunine for Treatment of Urothelial Cell Carcinoma at the National Cancer Institute of Naples

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of Vinflunine, after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic or recurrent Transitional Cell Cancer of the Urothelial Tract, TCCU, has been demonstrated in an international, randomized, phase III trial comparing Vinflunine plus Best Supportive Care, BSC, with BSC alone. On the basis of that study vinflunine has been approved by the European Medicine Association, EMA, for treatment of TCCU patients after failure of a platinum treatment. However, since data in clinical trials often differ from routine clinical practice due to unselected population and less strict monitoring, "real life" experiences are very helpful to verify the efficacy of a new therapy.

METHODS

This was a spontaneous, observational, retrospective study involving 43 patients with metastatic TCCU treated with vinflunine at our cancer center, data about demographics, disease characteristics, and previous treatments were collected and outcome and toxicities of vinflunine were analyzed.

RESULTS

41 of 43 patients were eligible for RR analysis, the Overall RR was 12%, the Disease Control Rate was 29%; when including only patients treated in II line the DCR rose to 33%; the median PFS and the median OS were 2.2 and 6.9 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings were consistent with the outcome data emerged in the phase III randomized trial and in the other observational studies conducted all around Europe in the last 2-3 years. This experience supports the use of vinflunine in patients with advanced TTCU as effective and manageable antineoplastic drug.

Comparison of single agent versus combined chemotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma: a meta-analysis

Background

Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for advanced urothelial cancer (UC) and is generally used in the first-line setting. However, the optimal salvage treatment for previously treated UC patients is unclear. We conducted a systematic review of published clinical trials of single agent versus combined chemotherapy as salvage treatment in previously treated UC patients.

Methods

Trials published between 1994 and 2015 were identified by an electronic search of public databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library). All relevant studies were independently identified by two authors for inclusion. Demographic data, treatment regimens, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), median progression-free and overall survival (PFS, OS), and grade 3/4 toxicities were extracted and analyzed using Comprehensive Meta Analysis software (Version 2.0).

Results

Fifty cohorts with 1,685 patients were included for analysis: 814 patients were treated with single agent chemotherapy and 871 with combined chemotherapy. Pooled OS was significantly higher at 1 year for combined chemotherapy than for single agent (relative risk [RR] 1.52; 95% CI: 1.01–2.37; P=0.03) but not for 2-year OS (RR 1.31; 95% CI: 0.92–1.85; P=0.064). Additionally, combined chemotherapy significantly improved ORR (RR 2.25; 95% CI: 1.60–3.18; P<0.001) and DCR (RR 1.12; 95% CI: 1.01–1.25, P=0.033) compared to single agent for advanced UC patients. As for grade 3 and 4 toxicities, more frequencies of leukopenia and thrombocytopenia were observed in the combined chemotherapy than in single agent group, while equivalent frequencies of anemia, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea were found between the two groups.

Conclusion

In comparison with single agent alone, combined chemotherapy as salvage treatment for advanced UC patients significantly improved ORR, DCR, and 1-year OS, but not 2-year OS. Our findings support the need to compare combined chemotherapy with single agent alone in the salvage setting in large prospective trials due to its potential survival benefit in advanced UC patients.

Efficacy of weekly paclitaxel treatment as a single agent chemotherapy following first-line cisplatin treatment in urothelial bladder cancer

The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of paclitaxel following a first-line cisplatin regimen in patients with metastatic bladder cancer. The present study retrospectively evaluated the clinical effects and toxicities of second-line paclitaxel regimens following first-line cisplatin treatment in metastatic bladder cancer. A total of 42 patients with progressing metastatic urothelial bladder cancer following cisplatin-based chemotherapy were enrolled. The patients received weekly treatment with paclitaxel (80 mg/m²) with a median duration of 3 months. The overall response rate, disease control rate and median progression free survival were 9.5, 45.2 and 6.4 months, respectively. Weekly paclitaxel was well-tolerated with rare grade III or IV toxicities. Second-line weekly paclitaxel treatment following first-line cisplatin-based chemotherapy is an effective and well-tolerated regimen in urothelial metastatic bladder cancer.

The safety and efficacy of gemcitabine for the treatment of bladder cancer

Bladder cancer is a common type of cancer with an estimated incidence of more than 70,000 patients and had a mortality of 16,000 patients in the US in 2015. In more than 70% of cases the disease is diagnosed at the non-muscle invasive stage. However, muscle invasive or metastatic stages need multimodal treatment strategies including surgical treatment and chemotherapy in a neoadjuvant, adjuvant or palliative setting. Gemcitabine is a pyrimidine antimetabolite that has shown efficacy when used systemically in bladder cancer with only mild toxicity compared to other chemotherapeutic agents. This article aims to summarize the results of clinical trials in monotherapeutic, combined or sequential treatment strategies, especially considering efficacy and safety of the different therapeutic regimes.

A Case of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Treated with Pemetrexed as Third-Line Chemotherapy with Discussion and Literature Review

Pemetrexed is an antifolate agent that is regarded as an alternative second-line chemotherapy against advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). However, there is limited information on pemetrexed in a third-line setting. We report a case of metastatic UC treated with pemetrexed as third-line chemotherapy following gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) and gemcitabine and docetaxel (GD) therapies. A 73-year-old man with a history of transurethral resection of bladder carcinoma presented with pollakiuria. CT revealed a mass in the left renal pelvis that had invaded into the parenchyma of the left kidney, as well as para-aortic and mediastinum lymph node enlargement. Urinary cytology of the lesion in the left renal pelvis revealed UC. Thus, the patient was diagnosed with left renal pelvic carcinoma (cT3N2M0). After having received 4 courses of GC therapy, another mediastinum lymph node was enlarged. He subsequently received 3 courses of GD therapy as second-line chemotherapy, which showed little efficacy against the metastatic lesions. The patient was administered 3 courses of pemetrexed as third-line chemotherapy; however, its effect on tumor reduction was not sufficient. Finally, metastasis to the liver was observed, and he died 21 months after initiation of chemotherapy. For pathological confirmation, needle biopsy of a metastatic lymph node performed after death revealed high-grade UC and a high positivity of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) in the tumor, which suggested that he could have benefited from anti-PD-L1 antibody immunotherapy. This report describes the outcome of pemetrexed treatment and proposes another possible candidate as third-line chemotherapy against metastatic UC.

Second-line single-agent versus doublet chemotherapy as salvage therapy for metastatic urothelial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of a combination of chemotherapeutic agent compared with single-agent chemotherapy in the second-line setting of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) are unclear. We aimed to study the survival impact of single-agent compared with doublet chemotherapy as second-line chemotherapy of advanced UC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Literature was searched for studies including single-agent or doublet chemotherapy in the second-line setting after platinum-based chemotherapy. Random-effects models were used to pool trial-level data according to treatment arm, including median progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) probability, and grade 3-4 toxicity. Univariable and multivariable analyses, including sensitivity analyses, were carried out, adjusting for the percent of patients with ECOG performance status ≥1 and hepatic metastases.

RESULTS

Forty-six arms of trials including 1910 patients were selected: 22 arms with single agent (n = 1202) and 24 arms with doublets (n = 708). The pooled ORR with single agents was 14.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.1-17.9] versus 31.9% [95% CI 27.3-36.9] with doublet chemotherapy. Pooled median PFS was 2.69 and 4.05 months, respectively. The pooled median OS was 6.98 and 8.50 months, respectively. Multivariably, the odds ratio for ORR and the pooled median difference of PFS were statistically significant (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002) whereas the median difference in OS was not (P = 0.284). When including single-agent vinflunine or taxanes only, differences were significant only for ORR (P < 0.001) favoring doublet chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in grade 3-4 toxicity were seen between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant improvements in ORR and PFS, doublet regimens did not extend OS compared with single agents for the second-line chemotherapy of UC. Prospective trials are necessary to elucidate the role of combination chemotherapy, with or without targeted agents, in the salvage setting. Currently, improvements in this field should be pursued considering single-agent chemotherapy as the foundation for new more active combinations.

Second-line therapies in metastatic urothelial carcinoma

Patients with relapsed or refractory urothelial carcinoma (UC) face a poor prognosis and a dearth of available treatment options that improve their survival. End-organ function and performance status play a vital role in the choice of second-line therapies. Evidence supporting the use of cytotoxic chemotherapy, as single agents or in combination, arises from small phase 2 studies with modest responses. With the evolution of genomic testing in UC, several pathways amenable to available targeted therapies have emerged. Encouraging patient participation in clinical trials is critical to improve patient outcomes and to advance the current modest treatment armamentarium.

Gemcitabine and docetaxel, an effective second-line chemotherapy for lung metastasis of urothelial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a gemcitabine and docetaxel (GD) combination as a second-line treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) after failure of first-line treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

From June 2006 to January 2012, 38 patients with metastatic UC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy received GD therapy. This consisted of gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) and docetaxel 40 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle as second-line chemotherapy. All the patients were evaluated for toxicity and assessed every cycle by imaging. We analyzed the efficacy of GD as second-line chemotherapy in the follow-up study.

RESULTS

The median number of GD treatment cycles was 4 (range 2-9); the objective response rate was 47.4 %; and the median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 4.1 and 10.8 months, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses on the GD treated group showed that the existence of lung metastases was the only prognostic factor for tumor response. Grade 3 treatment-related toxicity included neutropenia (31.6 %) and thrombocytopenia (15.8 %), and only one patient with grade 4 toxicity had thrombocytopenia (2.6 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The GD regimen as second-line chemotherapy was especially effective for lung metastatic UC and yielded favorable results in patients whose first-line platinum-based chemotherapy had failed. Given the safety and benefit profile seen in this study, a large prospective study is warranted to consider the potential utility of GD chemotherapy as a second-line for UC.

Methotrexate-paclitaxel-epirubicin-carboplatin as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder pretreated with cisplatin-gemcitabine: a phase II study

AIMS

To assess the efficacy and toxicity of methotrexate-paclitaxel-epirubicin-carboplatin combination as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the bladder pretreated with cisplatin-gemcitabine.

METHODS

In this prospective phase II study, patients with metastatic TCC of the bladder pretreated with first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine received on progression paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) i.v. and carboplatin (area under curve of 5) on day 1, and methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) and epirubicin 40 mg/m(2) on day 15. The whole course was repeated every 28 days. The end-points included clinical tumor response, treatment toxicity, quality of life and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 40, predominantly male, patients were enrolled (median age 62 years [range 46-69]). Efficacy and survival were assessed in 38 patients only, as two patients refused treatment after the first cycle. Grade 3 neutropenia was the commonest acute severe toxicity (12/40 patients; 30%). The overall response rate was 39% (15/38 patients). The median follow up was 14 months (range 3-45). The median progression-free and overall survival were 12 and 12.5 months, respectively. The 1-year progression-free and overall survival were 24 and 35%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Methotrexate-paclitaxel-epirubicin-carboplatin combination as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic TCC of the bladder results in a modest response rate with acceptable toxicity.

Gemcitabine chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic bladder carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

• To systematically review the literature on gemcitabine chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic bladder cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

• The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Onlinedatabase (MEDLINE), the Excerpta Medicadatabase (EMBASE), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature database(CIHNAL), the Cochrane database of randomized trials, the Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe emCiências da Saúdedatabase (LILACS), and Web of Science were searched to identify trials of gemcitabine for metastatic bladder cancer. Also searched were international guidelines on metastatic prostate cancer, trial registries, and recent systematic reviews. Data on trial design, survival, tumour response and toxicity outcomes were extracted from relevant studies.

RESULTS

• This review identified six randomized trials of combined chemotherapy with gemcitabine for the management of unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer. • One trial compared gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GCis) with methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/cisplatin(MVAC) and found no difference in overall survival (OS; hazard ratio 1.09) but a better safety profile with GCis, which was suggested as the treatment of choice. • A second trial evaluated GCis against gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCarbo) and reported similar median OS (12.8 vs 9.8 months), disease progression (8.3 vs 7.3 months) and tumour response rates (66% vs 56%) for the two patient groups. • A third trial compared GCis with GCis plus paclitaxel (GCisPac) and showed no significant difference in median OS (12.3 vs 15.3 months) and response rates (44% vs 43%) but greater toxicity with GCisPac. • A fourth trial assessed GCarbo against methotrexate plus carboplatin plus vinblastine in patients unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy and found similar tumour response rates for each regime (38% vs 20%) but the triplet regime was more toxic. • Two other randomized studies compared a 2-weekly maintenance regime of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel with a 3-weelky regime given for a maximum of six cycles and found that the maintenance schedule did not confer any additional survival benefit. • In all, 53 observational studies of gemcitabine chemotherapy were identified that varied considerably in the drug combinations used and schedules. Overall response rates (17-78%) and median OS (6.4-24.0 months) were variable with no combination being clearly superior.

CONCLUSIONS

• Gemcitabine combined chemotherapy is active in the management of metastatic bladder cancer. • GCis may be considered an alternative regime to MVAC. • GCarbo should be considered for patients unfit for cisplatin-based therapy.

First- and second-line therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder

Urothelial cancer of the bladder is the 4th most common malignancy in American men and the 9th most common in women. Although it is a chemosensitive disease, advanced bladder cancer seems to have reached a plateau with regard to median survival of patients. Standard first-line therapy remains gemcitabine plus cisplatin (gc) or methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (mvac). In patients deemed unfit to receive cisplatin, gemcitabine plus carboplatin or gemcitabine plus paclitaxel can be considered. To date, no standard therapy has been established for patients who recur or are refractory to first-line therapy. Second-line vinflunine, by way of superiority over best supportive care, has shown promise in a phase iii trial. Cisplatin-based therapy (mvac or gc) can also be offered to patients previously treated with cisplatin, especially if they responded previously and are considered platinum-sensitive. Novel targeted therapies are sorely needed to further improve the delivery and efficacy of chemotherapy.

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.

Personalized therapy for urothelial cancer: review of the clinical evidence

Despite a detailed understanding of the molecular aberrations driving the development of urothelial cancers, this knowledge has not translated into advances for the treatment of this disease. Urothelial cancers are chemosensitive, and platinum-based combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for advanced disease, as well as neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy for locally advanced disease. However, nearly half of patients who undergo resection of locally advanced urothelial cancer will relapse and eventually develop platinum-resistant disease. Clinical trials of targeted agents against angiogenesis and growth factors, as well as novel chemotheraputics, have generally been unsuccessful in urothelial cancers. Improvements in the theraputic arsenal for urothelial cancer depend upon identification of new targets and strategies to overcome platinum resistance.

Vinflunine in the treatment of advanced bladder cancer

Accounting for 14,000 deaths in the USA last year, research informs us that advanced bladder cancer is a lethal disease with a median survival that has remained a little over 1 year for the past two decades. For the majority of patients with metastatic disease, chemotherapy with cisplatin-based combinations is the standard first-line treatment. Although initial response rates are high, disease progression is common, creating a growing number of patients in need of effective second-line chemotherapy. For this population, no standard of care currently exists. Salvage chemotherapy is associated with low response rates and studies exploring potential clinical benefit over supportive care alone are limited to nonrandomized Phase II trials. Vinflunine, a novel anti-mitotic drug from the Vinca alkaloid class, is the first and only agent that has been compared with supportive care in the second-line setting. In Europe, vinflunine is approved as a treatment option for patients with advanced urothelial cancer who have failed a prior platinum-containing regimen. To date, in the USA, there is no FDA-approved second-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic bladder cancer and treatment continues to emphasize patient enrollment into a clinical trial.

[Systemic chemotherapy for bladder cancer: news in 2009]

This review summarizes the results of first-line and second-line systemic chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma as well as data from adjuvant and neoadjuvant trials for locally advanced bladder cancer. Whereas conventional systemic chemotherapy prevailed for over two decades, targeted therapeutics have been introduced to treat urothelial cancer during recent years. As in other tumor entities, molecular profiling will presumably emerge in the future as a means to tailor individual therapy.

Vinflunine in the treatment of bladder cancer

Vinflunine (VFL) is a third-generation bifluorinated semi-synthetic vinca alkaloid obtained by superacidic chemistry from its parent compound, vinorelbine. As with the other vinca alkaloids, the main antineoplastic effects of VFL arise from its interaction with tubulin, the major component of microtubules in mitotic spindles. In contrast to other vinca alkaloids, VFL shows some distinctive properties in terms of tubulin binding, possibly explaining its superior antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo compared with vinorelbine as well as its excellent safety profile. In transitional cell carcinoma (TCC), two single-agent phase II trials were performed testing VFL in platinum-pretreated patients, showing moderate response rates and promising disease control rates. Therefore, the first phase III trial in modern times for second-line TCC of the urothelium was designed in order to further investigate the activity of VFL. First results were presented at the 2008 ASCO conference. VFL appears to be a possible treatment option for patients with TCC progressing after first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy.

Systemic therapy for unresectable and metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium: first-line and beyond

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The review aims to provide an overview of recent advances and future research direction in the management of patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Early data of the randomized phase III study comparing paclitaxel, cisplatin, and gemcitabine with gemcitabine plus cisplatin for advanced urothelial cancer detected no survival difference. A phase II study investigated the safety and efficacy of trastuzumab, carboplatin, gemcitabine, and paclitaxel in human epidermal growth factor receptor-2/neu-positive advanced urothelial carcinoma and reported promising results. Renal-sparing regimens are under active development. A nonrandomized comparison of the 3-week with the 4-week schedule for gemcitabine and cisplatin showed that the 3-week schedule had less hematological toxicity and better dose intensity. Potential molecular markers such as excision repair cross-complementation group 1, emmprin, and survivin for survival and/or platinum resistance in patients with transitional cell carcinoma showed promise.

SUMMARY

Recent data do not support change in the current standard of care for advanced transitional cell carcinoma. Clinical testing of emerging anticancer therapies using new agents, new combinations, and new approaches is under active investigation. Rational combination and new strategy in clinical trial design are critical for new drug development for transitional cell carcinoma.