Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Gemcitabine and docetaxel as first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma: a phase II study

By A Ardavanis, D Tryfonopoulos, A Alexopoulos, C Kandylis, G Lainakis and G Rigatos

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate the toxicity and efficacy of the combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel in untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma. Patients with previously untreated, locally advanced/recurrent or metastatic urothelial carcinoma stage-IV disease were eligible. Patients with Performance status: PS ECOG >3 or age >75 years or creatinine clearance <50 ml min−1 were excluded. Study treatment consisted of docetaxel 75 mg m−2 (day 8) and gemcitabine 1000 mg m−2 (days 1+8), every 21 days for a total of six to nine cycles. A total of 31 patients with urothelial bladder cancer, 25 men and six women, aged 42–74 (median 64) years were enrolled. The majority of patients had a good PS (51.6%; PS 0). In all, 15 (48.3%) patients had locally advanced or recurrent disease only and 16 (54.8%) presented with distant metastatic spread, with multiple site involvement in 22.5%. Toxicity was primarily haematologic, and the most frequent grade 3–4 toxicities were anaemia 11 (6.7%) thrombocytopenia eight (4.9%), and neutropenia 45 (27.6%), with 10 (6.1%) episodes of febrile neutropenia. No toxic deaths occurred. A number of patients had some cardiovascular morbidity (38.7%). Nonhaematological toxicities except alopecia (29 patients) were mild. Overall response rate was 51.6%, including four complete responses (12.9%) and 12 partial responses (38.7%), while a further five patients had disease stabilisation (s.d. 16.1%). The median time to progression was 8 months (95% CI 5.1–9.2 months) and the median overall survival was 15 months (95% CI 11.2–18.5 months), with 1-year survival rate of 60%. In conclusion, this schedule of gemcitabine and docetaxel is very active and well tolerated as a first-line treatment for advanced/relapsing or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Although its relative efficacy and tolerance as compared to classic MVAC should be assessed in a phase III setting, the favourable toxicity profile of this regimen may offer an interesting alternative, particularly in patients with compromised renal function or cardiovascular disease

Topics: Clinical Studies
Publisher: Nature Publishing Group
OAI identifier: oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:2361881
Provided by: PubMed Central
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.g... (external link)
  • Suggested articles

    Citations

    1. (2002). Current and future prospectives in advanced bladder cancer: is there a new standard? Semin Oncol 29(Suppl 3): 3–14 von der Maase
    2. (2000). Gemcitabine and cisplatin vs methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational multicenter phase III study.
    3. (2000). Ifosfamide, paclitaxel, and cisplatin for patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract: final report of a phase II trial evaluating two dosing schedules. Cancer 88: 1671–1678 de Wit R
    4. (1998). Paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer: results of a phase II trial.
    5. (1982). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 19: 341a Lentner C
    6. (2000). Semin Oncol 29(Suppl 3): 15–19 Sternberg CN (2000) Gemcitabine in bladder cancer. Semin Oncol 27(Suppl 2): 31–39

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.