Bladder preservation with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: Retrospective comparison of three regimens.

Bladder (San Francisco, Calif.) Pub Date : 2024-09-12 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.14440/bladder.2024.0028
Makito Miyake, Yusuke Iemura, Yuki Oda, Tatsuki Miyamoto, Nobutaka Nishimura, Masaki Haramoto, Kaoru Yamaki, Isao Asakawa, Satoshi Anai, Kiyohide Fujimoto
{"title":"Bladder preservation with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: Retrospective comparison of three regimens.","authors":"Makito Miyake, Yusuke Iemura, Yuki Oda, Tatsuki Miyamoto, Nobutaka Nishimura, Masaki Haramoto, Kaoru Yamaki, Isao Asakawa, Satoshi Anai, Kiyohide Fujimoto","doi":"10.14440/bladder.2024.0028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives of the study are to evaluate the oncological and functional outcomes of three bladder preservation regimens: radiotherapy alone (RT-alone group), concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using gemcitabine plus platinum (GP-RT group), and low-dose gemcitabine (LD-Gem-RT group) for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The three oncological outcomes, bladder-intact distant metastasis-free survival (BI-DMFS), cancer-specific survival, and overall survival (OS), were compared among RT alone (<i>n</i> = 10), GP-RT (<i>n</i> = 16), and LD-Gem-RT (<i>n</i> = 11) groups. Treatment-related adverse events were evaluated against the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 5.0). In the LD-Gem-RT group, time-course changes in the domains and scales related to the quality of life were evaluated by utilizing three questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Age was significantly higher in the RT alone group (84 ± 7.2 years old) than in the GP-RT (74 ± 9.0) and LD-Gem-RT (75 ± 6.7) groups (<i>P</i> = 0.016). At a median follow-up of 26 months, the 2-year BI-DMFS rates were 80, 81, and 55% in the RT alone, GP-RT, and LD-Gem-RT groups, respectively, and the 2-year OS rates were 69, 62, and 81%, respectively. In the CRT groups, only the baseline CRP ≥ 1.0 mg/dL was associated with poor survival outcomes. Common early-onset adverse events included diarrhea, urinary frequency, and hematotoxicity. A questionnaire survey in the LD-Gem-RT group revealed patients experienced significant deterioration in the global health status/quality of life and the physical component summary score.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We reported the oncological and functional outcomes of bladder preservation therapy using three different regimens, yielding acceptable outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72421,"journal":{"name":"Bladder (San Francisco, Calif.)","volume":"11 2","pages":"e21200009"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11555196/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bladder (San Francisco, Calif.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14440/bladder.2024.0028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The objectives of the study are to evaluate the oncological and functional outcomes of three bladder preservation regimens: radiotherapy alone (RT-alone group), concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using gemcitabine plus platinum (GP-RT group), and low-dose gemcitabine (LD-Gem-RT group) for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Methods: The three oncological outcomes, bladder-intact distant metastasis-free survival (BI-DMFS), cancer-specific survival, and overall survival (OS), were compared among RT alone (n = 10), GP-RT (n = 16), and LD-Gem-RT (n = 11) groups. Treatment-related adverse events were evaluated against the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 5.0). In the LD-Gem-RT group, time-course changes in the domains and scales related to the quality of life were evaluated by utilizing three questionnaires.

Results: Age was significantly higher in the RT alone group (84 ± 7.2 years old) than in the GP-RT (74 ± 9.0) and LD-Gem-RT (75 ± 6.7) groups (P = 0.016). At a median follow-up of 26 months, the 2-year BI-DMFS rates were 80, 81, and 55% in the RT alone, GP-RT, and LD-Gem-RT groups, respectively, and the 2-year OS rates were 69, 62, and 81%, respectively. In the CRT groups, only the baseline CRP ≥ 1.0 mg/dL was associated with poor survival outcomes. Common early-onset adverse events included diarrhea, urinary frequency, and hematotoxicity. A questionnaire survey in the LD-Gem-RT group revealed patients experienced significant deterioration in the global health status/quality of life and the physical component summary score.

Conclusion: We reported the oncological and functional outcomes of bladder preservation therapy using three different regimens, yielding acceptable outcomes.

肌肉浸润性膀胱癌化疗同时保留膀胱:三种治疗方案的回顾性比较。
研究目的该研究的目的是评估三种膀胱保留方案的肿瘤学和功能性结果:单纯放疗(RT-alone 组)、吉西他滨加铂的同步化学放疗(CRT)(GP-RT 组)和低剂量吉西他滨(LD-Gem-RT 组)治疗肌层浸润性膀胱癌:方法:比较了单纯 RT 组(10 例)、GP-RT 组(16 例)和 LD-Gem-RT 组(11 例)的三种肿瘤学结果,即膀胱内无远处转移生存率(BI-DMFS)、癌症特异性生存率和总生存率(OS)。治疗相关不良事件根据不良事件通用术语标准(5.0版)进行评估。在 LD-Gem-RT 组中,通过使用三种调查问卷评估了与生活质量相关的领域和量表的时程变化:结果:单纯 RT 组(84 ± 7.2 岁)的年龄明显高于 GP-RT 组(74 ± 9.0 岁)和 LD-Gem-RT 组(75 ± 6.7 岁)(P = 0.016)。中位随访 26 个月后,单纯 RT 组、GP-RT 组和 LD-Gem-RT 组的 2 年 BI-DMFS 率分别为 80%、81% 和 55%,2 年 OS 率分别为 69%、62% 和 81%。在CRT组中,只有基线CRP≥1.0 mg/dL与不良生存结局相关。常见的早期不良反应包括腹泻、尿频和血液毒性。LD-Gem-RT组的问卷调查显示,患者的总体健康状况/生活质量和体能部分总分显著下降:我们报告了使用三种不同方案进行膀胱保留治疗的肿瘤学和功能性结果,结果是可以接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信