Benefit of Neoadjuvant Cisplatin-based Chemotherapy for Invasive Bladder Cancer Patients Treated with Radiation-based Therapy in a Real-world Setting: An Inverse Probability Treatment Weighted Analysis.

Bladder cancer Radiotherapy Urinary tract neoplasm

Journal

European urology oncology
ISSN: 2588-9311
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101724904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 Feb 2024
Historique:
received: 25 06 2023
revised: 29 11 2023
accepted: 23 01 2024
medline: 8 2 2024
pubmed: 8 2 2024
entrez: 7 2 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) improves survival for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) treated with radical cystectomy. Studies on the potential benefit of NAC before radiation-based therapy (RT) are conflicting. To evaluate the effect of NAC on patients with MIBC treated with curative-intent RT in a real-world setting. The study cohort consisted of 785 patients with MIBC (cT2-4aN0-2M0) who underwent RT at academic centers across Canada. Patients were classified into two treatment groups based on the administration of NAC before RT (NAC vs no NAC). The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with absolute standardized differences (ASDs) was used to balance covariates across treatment groups. The impact of NAC on complete response, overall, and cancer-specific survival (CSS) after RT in the weighted cohort was analyzed. After applying the exclusion criteria, 586 patients were included; 102 (17%) received NAC before RT. Patients in the NAC subgroup were younger (mean age 65 vs 77 yr; ASD 1.20); more likely to have Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 (87% vs 78%; ASD 0.28), lymphovascular invasion (32% vs 20%; ASD 0.27), higher cT stage (cT3-4 in 29% vs 20%; ASD 0.21), and higher cN stage (cN1-2 in 32% vs 4%; ASD 0.81); and more commonly treated with concurrent chemotherapy (79% vs 67%; ASD 0.28). After IPTW, NAC versus no NAC cohorts were well balanced (ASD <0.20) for all included covariates. NAC was significantly associated with improved CSS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.56; p < 0.001) and overall survival (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005). This study was limited by potential occult imbalances across treatment groups. If tolerated, NAC might be associated with improved survival and should be considered for eligible patients with MIBC planning to undergo bladder preservation with RT. Prospective trials are warranted. In this study, we showed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy might be associated with improved survival in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who elect for curative-intent radiation-based therapy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) improves survival for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) treated with radical cystectomy. Studies on the potential benefit of NAC before radiation-based therapy (RT) are conflicting.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effect of NAC on patients with MIBC treated with curative-intent RT in a real-world setting.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS METHODS
The study cohort consisted of 785 patients with MIBC (cT2-4aN0-2M0) who underwent RT at academic centers across Canada. Patients were classified into two treatment groups based on the administration of NAC before RT (NAC vs no NAC).
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS METHODS
The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with absolute standardized differences (ASDs) was used to balance covariates across treatment groups. The impact of NAC on complete response, overall, and cancer-specific survival (CSS) after RT in the weighted cohort was analyzed.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS CONCLUSIONS
After applying the exclusion criteria, 586 patients were included; 102 (17%) received NAC before RT. Patients in the NAC subgroup were younger (mean age 65 vs 77 yr; ASD 1.20); more likely to have Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 (87% vs 78%; ASD 0.28), lymphovascular invasion (32% vs 20%; ASD 0.27), higher cT stage (cT3-4 in 29% vs 20%; ASD 0.21), and higher cN stage (cN1-2 in 32% vs 4%; ASD 0.81); and more commonly treated with concurrent chemotherapy (79% vs 67%; ASD 0.28). After IPTW, NAC versus no NAC cohorts were well balanced (ASD <0.20) for all included covariates. NAC was significantly associated with improved CSS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.56; p < 0.001) and overall survival (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005). This study was limited by potential occult imbalances across treatment groups.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
If tolerated, NAC might be associated with improved survival and should be considered for eligible patients with MIBC planning to undergo bladder preservation with RT. Prospective trials are warranted.
PATIENT SUMMARY RESULTS
In this study, we showed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy might be associated with improved survival in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who elect for curative-intent radiation-based therapy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38326142
pii: S2588-9311(24)00040-3
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.01.014
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Ronald Kool (R)

Department of Urology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Abdominal Surgery, Division of Urologic Oncology, Erasto Gaertner-Cancer Center, Curitiba, Brazil.

Alice Dragomir (A)

Department of Urology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Girish S Kulkarni (GS)

Department of Surgery (Urology), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and the University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Gautier Marcq (G)

Department of Urology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Urology Department, Claude Huriez Hospital, CHU Lille, Lille, France; CANTHER - Cancer Heterogeneity Plasticity and Resistance to Therapies, CNRS, Inserm, CHU Lille, Institut Pasteur de Lille, University of Lille, Lille, France.

Rodney H Breau (RH)

Division of Urology, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Michael Kim (M)

Department of Surgery (Urology), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and the University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Ionut Busca (I)

Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Hamidreza Abdi (H)

Division of Urology, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Mark Dawidek (M)

Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Michael Uy (M)

Division of Urology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Gagan Fervaha (G)

Department of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.

Fabio L Cury (FL)

Department of Urology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Nimira Alimohamed (N)

Division of Medical Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Jonathan Izawa (J)

Division of Urology, Western University, London, ON, Canada.

Claudio Jeldres (C)

Division of Urology, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.

Ricardo Rendon (R)

Department of Urology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Bobby Shayegan (B)

Division of Urology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Robert Siemens (R)

Department of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.

Peter C Black (PC)

Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Wassim Kassouf (W)

Department of Urology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada. Electronic address: wassim.kassouf.med@ssss.gouv.qc.ca.

Classifications MeSH