Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
BMC Cancer ; 16(1): 752, 2016 09 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27664126

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based systemic chemotherapy is considered the backbone for management of advanced urothelial carcinomas. However there is a lack of real world data on the use of such chemotherapy regimens, on patient profiles and on management after treatment failure. METHODS: Fifty-one randomly selected physicians from 4 European countries registered 218 consecutive patients in progression or relapse following a first platinum-based chemotherapy. Patient characteristics, tumor history and treatment regimens, as well as the considerations of physicians on the management of urothelial carcinoma were recorded. RESULTS: A systemic platinum-based regimen had been administered as the initial chemotherapy in 216 patients: 15 in the neoadjuvant setting, 61 in adjuvant therapy conditions, 137 in first-line advanced setting and 3 in other conditions. Of these patients, 76 (35 %) were initially considered as cisplatin-unfit, mainly because of renal impairment (52 patients). After platinum failure, renal impairment was observed in 44 % of patients, ECOG Performance Status ≥ 2 in 17 %, hemoglobinemia < 10 g/dL in 16 %, hepatic metastases in 13 %. 80 % of these patients received further anticancer therapy. Immediately after failure of adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy, most subsequent anticancer treatments were chemotherapy doublets (35/58), whereas after therapy failure in the advanced setting most patients receiving further anticancer drugs were treated with a single agent (80/114). After first progression to chemotherapy, treatment decisions were mainly driven by Performance Status and prior response to chemotherapy (>30 % patients). The most frequent all-settings second anticancer therapy regimen was vinflunine (70 % of single-agent and 42 % of all subsequent treatments), the main reasons evoked by physicians (>1 out of 4) being survival benefit, safety and phase III evidence. CONCLUSION: In this daily practice experience, a majority of patients with urothelial carcinoma previously treated with a platinum-based therapy received a second chemotherapy regimen, most often a single agent after an initial chemotherapy in the advanced setting and preferably a cytotoxic combination after a neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. Performance Status and prior response to chemotherapy were the main drivers of further treatment decisions.


Asunto(s)
Anemia/epidemiología , Enfermedades Renales/epidemiología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/epidemiología , Platino (Metal)/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Urotelio/patología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Masculino , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/complicaciones , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/patología
2.
Clin Transl Oncol ; 21(1): 64-74, 2019 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30565086

RESUMEN

The goal of this article is to provide recommendations about the management of muscle-invasive (MIBC) and metastatic bladder cancer. New molecular subtypes of MIBC are associated with specific clinical-pathological characteristics. Radical cystectomy and lymph node dissection are the gold standard for treatment and neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a cisplatin-based combination should be recommended in fit patients. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in MIBC remains controversial; its use must be considered in patients with high-risk who are able to tolerate a cisplatin-based regimen, and have not received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Bladder-preserving approaches are reasonable alternatives to cystectomy in selected patients for whom cystectomy is not contemplated either for clinical or personal reasons. Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the standard first-line protocol for metastatic disease. In the case of unfit patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine should be considered the preferred first-line chemotherapy treatment option, while pembrolizumab and atezolizumab can be contemplated for individuals with high PD-L1 expression. In cases of progression after platinum-based therapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are standard alternatives. Vinflunine is another option when anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy is not possible. There are no data from randomized clinical trials regarding moving on to immuno-oncology agents.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de los Músculos/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/terapia , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Terapia Combinada , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Neoplasias de los Músculos/secundario , Invasividad Neoplásica , Pronóstico , Sociedades Médicas , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/patología
3.
Clin. transl. oncol. (Print) ; 21(1): 64-74, ene. 2019. tab
Artículo en Inglés | IBECS (España) | ID: ibc-183345

RESUMEN

The goal of this article is to provide recommendations about the management of muscle-invasive (MIBC) and metastatic bladder cancer. New molecular subtypes of MIBC are associated with specific clinical-pathological characteristics. Radical cystectomy and lymph node dissection are the gold standard for treatment and neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a cisplatin-based combination should be recommended in fit patients. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in MIBC remains controversial; its use must be considered in patients with high-risk who are able to tolerate a cisplatin-based regimen, and have not received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Bladder-preserving approaches are reasonable alternatives to cystectomy in selected patients for whom cystectomy is not contemplated either for clinical or personal reasons. Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the standard first-line protocol for metastatic disease. In the case of unfit patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine should be considered the preferred first-line chemotherapy treatment option, while pembrolizumab and atezolizumab can be contemplated for individuals with high PD-L1 expression. In cases of progression after platinum-based therapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are standard alternatives. Vinflunine is another option when anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy is not possible. There are no data from randomized clinical trials regarding moving on to immuno-oncology agents


No disponible


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales/terapia , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/terapia , Neoplasias de los Músculos/terapia , Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Invasividad Neoplásica/patología , Neoplasias de los Músculos/secundario , Cistectomía/métodos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA