Oncological Outcomes of Sequential Intravesical Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Patients with Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Niv Milbar, Max Kates, Meera R. Chappidi, Filippo Pederzoli, Takahiro Yoshida, Alexander I. Sankin, Phillip M. Pierorazio, Mark P. Schoenberg, Trinity J. Bivalacqua

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) unresponsive/relapsing patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who prefer bladder preservation over radical cystectomy (RC) or those who do not qualify for surgery may be offered intravesical therapies. Gemcitabine (GEM) combined with Docetaxel (DOCE) has been offered at Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH). Objective: To evaluate experience with GEM/DOCE, to confirm safety of the regimen, to identify populations that may benefit most, and to consider the appropriate endpoints for judging efficacy of second line therapies. Methods: Thirty-three patients who received full induction GEM/DOCE since 2011, per the protocol adapted from U. Iowa, were identified and characterized. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with recurrence. Cox proportional hazard models evaluated risk factors for disease-free survival (DFS) and high-grade recurrence-free survival (HG-RFS). Results: There were no serious adverse effects of therapy. Across all patients, median follow-up time was 18.6 months with a median DFS of 6.5 months, 42% 1-year, and 24% 2-year DFS. Median HG-RFS was 17.1 months with 56% 1-year and 42% 2-year HG-RFS. Among patients initially presenting with HG-NMIBC, 46% (13/28) had HG recurrence. BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients (N= 25) displayed 49% 1-year HG-RFS and 34% 2-year HG-RFS. In total, there were 5 LG and 16 HG recurrences, with 5 progressions and 8 cystectomies among these. Conclusions: GEM/DOCE is a well-tolerated therapy that deserves further study as an alternative to immediate RC for highly selected patients with HG-NMIBC. BCG naïve patients responded more effectively than BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients. As anticipated, GEM/DOCE efficacy was improved for HG only patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)293-303
Number of pages11
JournalBladder Cancer
Volume3
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

docetaxel
gemcitabine
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
Recurrence
Bacillus
Cystectomy
Survival
Disease-Free Survival
Therapeutics
Proportional Hazards Models

Keywords

  • bladder
  • docetaxel
  • gemcitabine
  • Urinary bladder neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Urology

Cite this

Oncological Outcomes of Sequential Intravesical Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Patients with Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer. / Milbar, Niv; Kates, Max; Chappidi, Meera R.; Pederzoli, Filippo; Yoshida, Takahiro; Sankin, Alexander I.; Pierorazio, Phillip M.; Schoenberg, Mark P.; Bivalacqua, Trinity J.

In: Bladder Cancer, Vol. 3, No. 4, 01.01.2017, p. 293-303.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Milbar, Niv ; Kates, Max ; Chappidi, Meera R. ; Pederzoli, Filippo ; Yoshida, Takahiro ; Sankin, Alexander I. ; Pierorazio, Phillip M. ; Schoenberg, Mark P. ; Bivalacqua, Trinity J. / Oncological Outcomes of Sequential Intravesical Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Patients with Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer. In: Bladder Cancer. 2017 ; Vol. 3, No. 4. pp. 293-303.
@article{6d35d9bd706b489f997832397f41d15b,
title = "Oncological Outcomes of Sequential Intravesical Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Patients with Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer",
abstract = "Background: Bacillus Calmette-Gu{\'e}rin (BCG) unresponsive/relapsing patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who prefer bladder preservation over radical cystectomy (RC) or those who do not qualify for surgery may be offered intravesical therapies. Gemcitabine (GEM) combined with Docetaxel (DOCE) has been offered at Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH). Objective: To evaluate experience with GEM/DOCE, to confirm safety of the regimen, to identify populations that may benefit most, and to consider the appropriate endpoints for judging efficacy of second line therapies. Methods: Thirty-three patients who received full induction GEM/DOCE since 2011, per the protocol adapted from U. Iowa, were identified and characterized. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with recurrence. Cox proportional hazard models evaluated risk factors for disease-free survival (DFS) and high-grade recurrence-free survival (HG-RFS). Results: There were no serious adverse effects of therapy. Across all patients, median follow-up time was 18.6 months with a median DFS of 6.5 months, 42{\%} 1-year, and 24{\%} 2-year DFS. Median HG-RFS was 17.1 months with 56{\%} 1-year and 42{\%} 2-year HG-RFS. Among patients initially presenting with HG-NMIBC, 46{\%} (13/28) had HG recurrence. BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients (N= 25) displayed 49{\%} 1-year HG-RFS and 34{\%} 2-year HG-RFS. In total, there were 5 LG and 16 HG recurrences, with 5 progressions and 8 cystectomies among these. Conclusions: GEM/DOCE is a well-tolerated therapy that deserves further study as an alternative to immediate RC for highly selected patients with HG-NMIBC. BCG na{\"i}ve patients responded more effectively than BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients. As anticipated, GEM/DOCE efficacy was improved for HG only patients.",
keywords = "bladder, docetaxel, gemcitabine, Urinary bladder neoplasms",
author = "Niv Milbar and Max Kates and Chappidi, {Meera R.} and Filippo Pederzoli and Takahiro Yoshida and Sankin, {Alexander I.} and Pierorazio, {Phillip M.} and Schoenberg, {Mark P.} and Bivalacqua, {Trinity J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3233/BLC-170126",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "293--303",
journal = "Bladder Cancer",
issn = "2352-3727",
publisher = "IOS Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Oncological Outcomes of Sequential Intravesical Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Patients with Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

AU - Milbar, Niv

AU - Kates, Max

AU - Chappidi, Meera R.

AU - Pederzoli, Filippo

AU - Yoshida, Takahiro

AU - Sankin, Alexander I.

AU - Pierorazio, Phillip M.

AU - Schoenberg, Mark P.

AU - Bivalacqua, Trinity J.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Background: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) unresponsive/relapsing patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who prefer bladder preservation over radical cystectomy (RC) or those who do not qualify for surgery may be offered intravesical therapies. Gemcitabine (GEM) combined with Docetaxel (DOCE) has been offered at Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH). Objective: To evaluate experience with GEM/DOCE, to confirm safety of the regimen, to identify populations that may benefit most, and to consider the appropriate endpoints for judging efficacy of second line therapies. Methods: Thirty-three patients who received full induction GEM/DOCE since 2011, per the protocol adapted from U. Iowa, were identified and characterized. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with recurrence. Cox proportional hazard models evaluated risk factors for disease-free survival (DFS) and high-grade recurrence-free survival (HG-RFS). Results: There were no serious adverse effects of therapy. Across all patients, median follow-up time was 18.6 months with a median DFS of 6.5 months, 42% 1-year, and 24% 2-year DFS. Median HG-RFS was 17.1 months with 56% 1-year and 42% 2-year HG-RFS. Among patients initially presenting with HG-NMIBC, 46% (13/28) had HG recurrence. BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients (N= 25) displayed 49% 1-year HG-RFS and 34% 2-year HG-RFS. In total, there were 5 LG and 16 HG recurrences, with 5 progressions and 8 cystectomies among these. Conclusions: GEM/DOCE is a well-tolerated therapy that deserves further study as an alternative to immediate RC for highly selected patients with HG-NMIBC. BCG naïve patients responded more effectively than BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients. As anticipated, GEM/DOCE efficacy was improved for HG only patients.

AB - Background: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) unresponsive/relapsing patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who prefer bladder preservation over radical cystectomy (RC) or those who do not qualify for surgery may be offered intravesical therapies. Gemcitabine (GEM) combined with Docetaxel (DOCE) has been offered at Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH). Objective: To evaluate experience with GEM/DOCE, to confirm safety of the regimen, to identify populations that may benefit most, and to consider the appropriate endpoints for judging efficacy of second line therapies. Methods: Thirty-three patients who received full induction GEM/DOCE since 2011, per the protocol adapted from U. Iowa, were identified and characterized. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with recurrence. Cox proportional hazard models evaluated risk factors for disease-free survival (DFS) and high-grade recurrence-free survival (HG-RFS). Results: There were no serious adverse effects of therapy. Across all patients, median follow-up time was 18.6 months with a median DFS of 6.5 months, 42% 1-year, and 24% 2-year DFS. Median HG-RFS was 17.1 months with 56% 1-year and 42% 2-year HG-RFS. Among patients initially presenting with HG-NMIBC, 46% (13/28) had HG recurrence. BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients (N= 25) displayed 49% 1-year HG-RFS and 34% 2-year HG-RFS. In total, there were 5 LG and 16 HG recurrences, with 5 progressions and 8 cystectomies among these. Conclusions: GEM/DOCE is a well-tolerated therapy that deserves further study as an alternative to immediate RC for highly selected patients with HG-NMIBC. BCG naïve patients responded more effectively than BCG unresponsive/relapsing patients. As anticipated, GEM/DOCE efficacy was improved for HG only patients.

KW - bladder

KW - docetaxel

KW - gemcitabine

KW - Urinary bladder neoplasms

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045399395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045399395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3233/BLC-170126

DO - 10.3233/BLC-170126

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85045399395

VL - 3

SP - 293

EP - 303

JO - Bladder Cancer

JF - Bladder Cancer

SN - 2352-3727

IS - 4

ER -