Mp32-04 gemcitabine–cisplatin versus mvac chemotherapy in urothelial carcinoma: a nationwide cohort study

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP32-04 GEMCITABINE–CISPLATIN VERSUS MVAC CHEMOTHERAPY IN UROTHELIAL CARCINOMA: A NATIONWIDE COHORT STUDY Se Young Choi, Jong Hyun Tae, Byung Hoon Chi, In Ho Chang, Tae-Hyoung Kim, Soon Chul Myung, Jung Hoon Kim, Jin Wook Kim, and Yong Seong Lee Se Young ChoiSe Young Choi More articles by this author , Jong Hyun TaeJong Hyun Tae More articles by this author , Byung Hoon ChiByung Hoon Chi More articles by this author , In Ho ChangIn Ho Chang More articles by this author , Tae-Hyoung KimTae-Hyoung Kim More articles by this author , Soon Chul MyungSoon Chul Myung More articles by this author , Jung Hoon KimJung Hoon Kim More articles by this author , Jin Wook KimJin Wook Kim More articles by this author , and Yong Seong LeeYong Seong Lee More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003265.04AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the trends in methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) and gemcitabine–cisplatin (GC) regimens in Korean patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) and compared the side effects and overall survival (OS) rates of the two regimens using nationwide population-based data. METHODS: The data of patients diagnosed with UC between 2004 and 2016 were collected using the National Health Insurance Service database. The overall treatment trends were assessed according to the chemotherapy regimens. The MVAC and GC groups were matched by propensity scores. Cox proportional hazard analysis and Kaplan–Meier analysis were performed to assess survival. RESULTS: Of 3,108 patients with UC, 2,880 patients were treated with GC and 228 (7.3%) were treated with MVAC. The transfusion rate and volume were similar in both the groups, but the granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) usage rate and number were higher in the MVAC group than in the GC group. Both groups had similar OS. Multivariate analysis revealed that the chemotherapy regimen was not a significant factor for OS. Subgroup analysis revealed that a period of ≥3 months from diagnosis to systemic therapy enhanced the prognostic effects of the GC regimen. CONCLUSIONS: The GC regimen was widely used as the first-line chemotherapy in more than 90% of our study population with metastatic UC. The MVAC regimen showed similar OS to the GC regimen but needed greater use of G-CSF. The GC regimen could be a suitable treatment option for metastatic UC after ≥3 months from diagnosis. Source of Funding: This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (NRF-2022R1A2C2008207) © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e441 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Se Young Choi More articles by this author Jong Hyun Tae More articles by this author Byung Hoon Chi More articles by this author In Ho Chang More articles by this author Tae-Hyoung Kim More articles by this author Soon Chul Myung More articles by this author Jung Hoon Kim More articles by this author Jin Wook Kim More articles by this author Yong Seong Lee More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...