This is an archive of papers published by the staff and faculty of Fox Chase Cancer Center. For questions about content, please contact Talbot Research Library
Last updated on
Osterman CK , Babu DS , Geynisman DM , Lewis B , Somer RA , Balar AV , Zibelman MR , Guancial EA , Antinori G , Yu S , Narayan V , Guzzo TJ , Plimack ER , Vaughn DJ , Fung C , Mamtani R
Efficacy of Split Schedule Versus Conventional Schedule Neoadjuvant Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer
Oncologist. 2019 May;24(5) :688-690
PMID: 30728277 PMCID: PMC6516116 URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30728277
AbstractNeoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (NAC; 70 mg/m(2)) is standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma (MIBC). Many patients (pts) cannot receive cisplatin because of renal impairment, and administration of cisplatin 35 mg/m(2) on day 1 + 8 or 1 + 2 (i.e., split schedule) is a commonly used alternative. In this retrospective analysis, we compared complete (pT0) and partial (<pT2) pathologic response rates between split schedule (SS) and conventional schedule (CS) pts, after 1:1 matching on chemotherapy regimen, number of cycles, tumor histology, and clinical stage. Eighty matched pts were identified. pT0 rates were 17.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7%-33%) and 32.5% (95% CI, 19%-49%) in SS and CS cisplatin pts, respectively (p = .21), corresponding to an odds ratio for pT0 of 0.45 (95% CI, 0.16-1.31) with SS cisplatin. Split schedule cisplatin was associated with numerically but not statistically significant lower pathologic response rates relative to full dose.
Notes1549-490x Osterman, Chelsea K Babu, Dilip S Geynisman, Daniel M Lewis, Bianca Somer, Robert A Balar, Arjun V Zibelman, Matthew R Guancial, Elizabeth A Antinori, Gianna Yu, Shun Narayan, Vivek Guzzo, Thomas J Plimack, Elizabeth R Vaughn, David J Fung, Chunkit Mamtani, Ronac Journal Article United States .Oncologist. 2019 May;24(5):688-690. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0561. Epub 2019 Feb 6.