Phase I/II study of a combined gemcitabine, etoposide, and cisplatin chemotherapy regimen for metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
BACKGROUND
The authors attempted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of gemcitabine in combination with etoposide and cisplatin as a chemotherapy regimen and investigated the safety and antitumor activity with the recommended doses of gemcitabine with etoposide and cisplatin for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma.


METHODS
Patients age 75 years or younger with measurable lesions, creatinine clearance>or=50 mL per minute, and adequate bone marrow and hepatic function were studied. Etoposide and cisplatin were given on Days 1 through 3 at fixed doses of 75 mg/m2 and 25 mg/m2, respectively, and gemcitabine was given on Days 1, 8, and 15. In the Phase I component, gemcitabine was administered at increasing doses from 600 mg/m2. Cycles were repeated every 28 days unless progressive disease was encountered.


RESULTS
In Phase I, with the initially fixed doses of etoposide and cisplatin, the MTD of gemcitabine could not be determined because of the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicity at Level 1 in all 3 patients. When the doses of etoposide and cisplatin were modified to 60 mg/m2 and 20 mg/m2, respectively, the MTD of gemcitabine was 1000 mg/m2. Next, 19 additional patients were entered into Phase II with the recommended gemcitabine dose of 800 mg/m2, and 20 patients in all were treated at this dose level. The main toxicity was bone marrow suppression, with Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia recognized in 20 patients (100%) and 14 patients (70%), respectively, although no toxic deaths occurred. In total, all 31 patients at all dose levels had an assessable response, with 6 complete responses and 15 partial responses observed, for an overall response rate of 67.7%. Patients who had visceral metastasis had a significantly worse response rate than patients who had lymph node metastasis alone (50.0% vs. 78.9%; P=.042). The response rate (66.7%) for 21 patients who received prior chemotherapy was not different from that for 10 chemotherapy-naive patients. The median survival for all patients was 13.1 months, and 4 patients survived for >2 years with no evidence of disease. Patients younger than age 65 years had significantly better survival than patients age 65 years or older (P=.026).


CONCLUSIONS
Although bone marrow toxicity was considerable, combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine, etoposide, and cisplatin appeared to be very active in patients with urothelial carcinoma and may be especially promising for younger patients, although further study is warranted.
Tsukamoto
Tetsuro
T
Department of Urology, Cancer Institute Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. tskma.tsuka5@m2.pbc.ne.jp
Yonese
Junji
J
Ohkubo
Yuhei
Y
Fukui
Iwao
I
D000368:Aged; D000971:Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002295:Carcinoma, Transitional Cell / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000556:secondary; D002945:Cisplatin / Q000008:administration & dosage; D003841:Deoxycytidine / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000031:analogs & derivatives; D005047:Etoposide / Q000008:administration & dosage; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015996:Survival Rate; D014571:Urologic Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000473:pathology; D000093542:Gemcitabine
D003841:Deoxycytidine; D005047:Etoposide; D002945:Cisplatin; D000093542:Gemcitabine