Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Maintenance treatment with gemcitabine have a promising activity on metastatic bladder cancer survival.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of gemcitabine maintenance treatment on survival in patients with metastatic bladder cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Gemcitabine maintenance monotherapy was administered following the standard platinum-gemcitabine therapy in patients with metastatic bladder cancer. Patients who had responded to standard treatment received maintenance gemcitabine therapy as 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every three weeks until progression or development of unacceptable toxicity. The following clinical factors were noted: performance status, age, sex, stage, site of metastasis, choice of cisplatin-gemcitabine or carboplatin-gemcitabine, response rates to the initial chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for standard treatment, and following gemcitabine monotreatment and for maintenance gemcitabine therapy were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS: A total of 88 patients with metastatic bladder cancer treated between February 2009 to October 2015 were evaluated retrospectively and 23 patients (26.1%) who had responded to six cycles of platinum-gemcitabine treatment were included in this study. Maintenance gamcitabine was administered for a median of 7 times (range 3-14 times). Grade 3 hematotoxicity according to the criteria of the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events was observed in 7 (30.4%) patients. Median PFS of patients was 46 (range: 30-82) weeks for platinum-based treatment plus maintenance gemcitabine therapy. A higher median PFS was obtained in patients who were <65 year-olds, without organ metastasis with objective response rate, however, it was statistically insignificant.

CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine maintenance therapy in metastatic bladder cancer patients who did not shown progression after the standard platinum-gemcitabine treatment contributes to survival and presents low toxicity profile, when compared to historical controls.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app