Practice patterns and outcomes of conventional versus split-dose cisplatin in neoadjuvant ddMVAC in bladder cancer.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY Bladder Cancer Pub Date : 2025-01-31 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23523735241310388
Eryn B Callihan, Elizabeth Molina Kuna, Corbin J Eule, Elizabeth R Kessler, Thomas W Flaig
{"title":"Practice patterns and outcomes of conventional versus split-dose cisplatin in neoadjuvant ddMVAC in bladder cancer.","authors":"Eryn B Callihan, Elizabeth Molina Kuna, Corbin J Eule, Elizabeth R Kessler, Thomas W Flaig","doi":"10.1177/23523735241310388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The practice patterns and efficacy of ddMVAC administered with split-dose cisplatin for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) remains largely undefined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To characterize the application and overall survival (OS) in patients with MIBC receiving conventional ddMVAC versus split-dosed ddMVAC and to examine the predictive variables in those receiving split-dosed cisplatin.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from the CancerLinQ Discovery database, we identified 626 patients with bladder cancer between 2000-2023 with receipt of ddMVAC. The primary outcome was OS by receipt of split-dose versus conventional ddMVAC. A secondary outcome of interest assessed predictors of receipt of split-dose ddMVAC. Use of split-dose versus conventional ddMVAC was compared using chi-square tests. Univariate and multivariable OS were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Predictors of receipt of split dose versus conventional ddMVAC were estimated using logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most patients with MIBC are treated with standard dose ddMVAC. In multivariate analysis, no statistically significant difference in OS was observed between split-dose and conventional ddMVAC (HR 1.3, CI 0.78-2.18, p = 0.316). We demonstrate a notable decline in the use of split-dose cisplatin over time. Baseline GFR and performance status were not predictors of split-dosing in this cohort.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most patients with MIBC received conventional ddMVAC with decreasing frequency of split-dose cisplatin use over time. We did not observe a difference in OS between patients with MIBC who received standard versus split-dose cisplatin.</p>","PeriodicalId":54217,"journal":{"name":"Bladder Cancer","volume":"11 1","pages":"23523735241310388"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11868797/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bladder Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23523735241310388","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The practice patterns and efficacy of ddMVAC administered with split-dose cisplatin for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) remains largely undefined.

Objective: To characterize the application and overall survival (OS) in patients with MIBC receiving conventional ddMVAC versus split-dosed ddMVAC and to examine the predictive variables in those receiving split-dosed cisplatin.

Methods: Using data from the CancerLinQ Discovery database, we identified 626 patients with bladder cancer between 2000-2023 with receipt of ddMVAC. The primary outcome was OS by receipt of split-dose versus conventional ddMVAC. A secondary outcome of interest assessed predictors of receipt of split-dose ddMVAC. Use of split-dose versus conventional ddMVAC was compared using chi-square tests. Univariate and multivariable OS were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Predictors of receipt of split dose versus conventional ddMVAC were estimated using logistic regression models.

Results: Most patients with MIBC are treated with standard dose ddMVAC. In multivariate analysis, no statistically significant difference in OS was observed between split-dose and conventional ddMVAC (HR 1.3, CI 0.78-2.18, p = 0.316). We demonstrate a notable decline in the use of split-dose cisplatin over time. Baseline GFR and performance status were not predictors of split-dosing in this cohort.

Conclusions: Most patients with MIBC received conventional ddMVAC with decreasing frequency of split-dose cisplatin use over time. We did not observe a difference in OS between patients with MIBC who received standard versus split-dose cisplatin.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Bladder Cancer
Bladder Cancer Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Bladder Cancer is an international multidisciplinary journal to facilitate progress in understanding the epidemiology/etiology, genetics, molecular correlates, pathogenesis, pharmacology, ethics, patient advocacy and survivorship, diagnosis and treatment of tumors of the bladder and upper urinary tract. The journal publishes research reports, reviews, short communications, and letters-to-the-editor. The journal is dedicated to providing an open forum for original research in basic science, translational research and clinical medicine that expedites our fundamental understanding and improves treatment of tumors of the bladder and upper urinary tract.
期刊最新文献
Summary from the NCI clinical trials planning meeting on next generation of clinical trials in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Management of bladder cancer in kidney transplant recipients: A narrative review. Single-cell RNA sequencing and spatial transcriptome analysis in bladder cancer: Current status and future perspectives. Impact of DNA repair deficiency on sensitivity to antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) payloads in bladder cancer. Practice patterns and outcomes of conventional versus split-dose cisplatin in neoadjuvant ddMVAC in bladder cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1