Case Report | FH-Deficient Uterine Leiomyomas: Pathological Insights into a Rare Tumor.

Q3 Medicine
The gulf journal of oncology Pub Date : 2025-05-01
Varun Goel, Arpit Jain, Dharmistha Basu, Nivedita Patnaik, Vineet Talwar, Siddhant Swamy, Sudhir Rawal
{"title":"Case Report | FH-Deficient Uterine Leiomyomas: Pathological Insights into a Rare Tumor.","authors":"Varun Goel, Arpit Jain, Dharmistha Basu, Nivedita Patnaik, Vineet Talwar, Siddhant Swamy, Sudhir Rawal","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Many patients cannot receive cisplatin due to advanced age, renal insufficiency, and poor performance status. As an alternative, gemcitabine-carboplatin (GCa) is frequently used, yet the comparative efficacy of GCa vs. gemcitabine-cisplatin (GC) in real-world settings remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis of 100 patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who received either GC (n=60) or GCa (n=40) from January 2022 to December 2024. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and side effects of therapy. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to calculate survival curves.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median PFS was 7.6 months (GC) vs 5.4 months (GCa) (p=0.03). The median OS was 13.8 months (GC) vs 10.1 months (GCa) (p=0.04). The ORR was higher in the GC group (GC, 42% versus GCa, 30%), but not statistically significant (p=0.08). Renal toxicity (grade 3/4) was higher in the GC group (18% vs 6%, p=0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GC demonstrates improved efficacy compared to GCa in terms of PFS and OS, although this comes with renal toxicity. GCa can be a reasonable option for patients not receiving cisplatin.</p>","PeriodicalId":53633,"journal":{"name":"The gulf journal of oncology","volume":"1 48","pages":"67-71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The gulf journal of oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Many patients cannot receive cisplatin due to advanced age, renal insufficiency, and poor performance status. As an alternative, gemcitabine-carboplatin (GCa) is frequently used, yet the comparative efficacy of GCa vs. gemcitabine-cisplatin (GC) in real-world settings remains uncertain.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 100 patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who received either GC (n=60) or GCa (n=40) from January 2022 to December 2024. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and side effects of therapy. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to calculate survival curves.

Results: The median PFS was 7.6 months (GC) vs 5.4 months (GCa) (p=0.03). The median OS was 13.8 months (GC) vs 10.1 months (GCa) (p=0.04). The ORR was higher in the GC group (GC, 42% versus GCa, 30%), but not statistically significant (p=0.08). Renal toxicity (grade 3/4) was higher in the GC group (18% vs 6%, p=0.02).

Conclusion: GC demonstrates improved efficacy compared to GCa in terms of PFS and OS, although this comes with renal toxicity. GCa can be a reasonable option for patients not receiving cisplatin.

缺fh的子宫平滑肌瘤:一种罕见肿瘤的病理观察。
背景:以顺铂为基础的化疗是晚期膀胱尿路上皮癌的标准一线治疗。许多患者由于高龄、肾功能不全和运动状态不佳而不能接受顺铂治疗。作为替代方案,吉西他滨-卡铂(GCa)经常被使用,但GCa与吉西他滨-顺铂(GC)在现实环境中的比较疗效仍然不确定。方法:我们对2022年1月至2024年12月期间接受GC (n=60)或GCa (n=40)的100例晚期尿路上皮癌患者进行了回顾性分析。主要终点为无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)。次要终点是客观缓解率(ORR)、疾病控制率(DCR)和治疗副作用。Kaplan-Meier法计算生存曲线。结果:中位PFS为7.6个月(GC) vs 5.4个月(GCa) (p=0.03)。中位OS为13.8个月(GC) vs 10.1个月(GCa) (p=0.04)。GC组的ORR较高(GC为42%,GCa为30%),但无统计学意义(p=0.08)。GC组的肾毒性(3/4级)更高(18% vs 6%, p=0.02)。结论:与GCa相比,GC在PFS和OS方面的疗效更好,尽管这伴随着肾脏毒性。对于未接受顺铂的患者,GCa是一种合理的选择。
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
The gulf journal of oncology
The gulf journal of oncology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书