Randomized phase II/III trial assessing gemcitabine/carboplatin and methotrexate/carboplatin/vinblastine in patients with advanced urothelial cancer who are unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy: EORTC study 30986

PURPOSE

This is the first randomized phase II/III trial comparing two carboplatin-based chemotherapy regimens in patients with urothelial cancer who are ineligible ("unfit") for cisplatin chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The primary objective of the phase III part of this study was to compare the overall survival (OS) of chemotherapy-naive patients with measurable disease and an impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate < 60 but > 30 mL/min) and/or performance score of 2 who were randomly assigned to receive either gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) or methotrexate/carboplatin/vinblastine (M-CAVI). To detect an increase of 50% in median survival with GC compared with M-CAVI (13.5 v 9 months) based on a two-sided log-rank test at error rates α = .05 and β = .20, 225 patients were required. Secondary end points were overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and quality of life.

RESULTS

In all, 238 patients were randomly assigned by 29 institutions over a period of 7 years. The median follow-up was 4.5 years. Best ORRs were 41.2% (36.1% confirmed response) for patients receiving GC versus 30.3% (21.0% confirmed response) for patients receiving M-CAVI (P = .08). Median OS was 9.3 months in the GC arm and 8.1 months in the M-CAVI arm (P = .64). There was no difference in PFS (P = .78) between the two arms. Severe acute toxicity (death, grade 4 thrombocytopenia with bleeding, grade 3 or 4 renal toxicity, neutropenic fever, or mucositis) was observed in 9.3% of patients receiving GC and 21.2% of patients receiving M-CAVI.

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences in efficacy between the two treatment groups. The incidence of severe acute toxicities was higher for those receiving M-CAVI.

[Advances in uro-oncology "OncoForum": the best of 2010]

OBJECTIVE

To highlight the most important issues of the 2010 annual meetings of the European Association of Urology, EAU), the American Urological Association, AUA, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, ASCO, and the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, ASTRO.

METHODS

A group of experts in oncological urology selected the most important summaries of the four congresses. Subsequently, the revisors assessed the findings in relation to their present and future impact on clinical practice. This document includes the summaries with the highest points.

RESULTS

The following messages were considered important. In pT3 prostate cancer, postoperative radiotherapy (RT) improves local control and biochemical progression-free survival, with no significant impact on distant metastasis and overall survival. In patients with bladder cancer without muscle invasion and with the risk of intermediate recurrence, maintenance chemotherapy does not increase recurrence-free survival after transurethral resection. There is no evidence of a synergist effect of the combination of Temsirolimus/ Bevacizumab in patients with metastatic kidney cell carcinoma without prior treatment. In the SWENOTECA V protocol for the treatment of seminomatous germ-cell testicular cancer, the adjuvant RT was interrupted because the concern regarding the induction of secondary cancers was greater than the reduction of relapses.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2010, new data was produced on the diagnosis and treatment in oncological urology, thanks to the interesting work of different trials.

Treatment of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer "unfit" for Cisplatin-based chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is considered standard first-line treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. However, a large proportion of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma are considered "unfit" for cisplatin. The purpose of this review is to define unfit patients and to identify treatment options for this subgroup of patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this review, the criteria used to define unfit patients are explored and the results of prospective clinical trials evaluating chemotherapeutic regimens in unfit patients are summarized.

RESULTS

Several phase II trials and a single, large phase III trial have explored chemotherapeutic regimens for the treatment of unfit patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Heterogeneous eligibility criteria have been used to define unfit patients in these studies. A uniform definition of unfit is proposed on the basis of the results of a survey of genitourinary medical oncologists. According to this definition, unfit patients would meet at least one of the following criteria: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2, creatinine clearance less than 60 mL/min, grade ≥ 2 hearing loss, grade ≥ 2 neuropathy, and/or New York Heart Association Class III heart failure.

CONCLUSION

Additional studies to optimize treatment for this important subset of patients are needed. A uniform definition of unfit patients will lead to more uniform clinical trials, enhanced ability to interpret the results of these trials, and a greater likelihood of developing a viable strategy for regulatory approval.