Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26639198›Full record

Trial reportCancer research and treatment2016

Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, and Lapatinib as Neoadjuvant Therapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

Vivek Narayan, Ronac Mamtani, Stephen Keefe, Thomas Guzzo, S Bruce Malkowicz, David J Vaughn

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer research and treatment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Novel Tyrosine Kinase Targets in Urothelial Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vivek NarayanDivision of Medical Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Ronac MamtaniDivision of Medical Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Stephen KeefeDivision of Medical Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Thomas GuzzoDepartment of Urology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
S Bruce MalkowiczDepartment of Urology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
David J VaughnDivision of Medical Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Insulin resistance in the development and progression of invasive bladder cancerK23CA187185 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MAMTANI, RONAC · 2015 to 2019
$872k
NCI NIH HHS K23 CA187185
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and lapatinib (GCL) as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) planned for radical cystectomy. MATERIALS AND

methodsFour cycles of GCL were administered as neoadjuvant therapy for patients with MIBC. Although initially designed as a phase II efficacy study with a primary endpoint of pathologic complete response at the time of radical cystectomy, the dose selected for investigation proved excessively toxic. A total of six patients were enrolled.

resultsThe initial four patients received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of each 21-day treatment cycle. Lapatinib was administered as 1,000 mg orally daily starting one week prior to the initiation of cycle 1 of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) and continuing until the completion of cycle 4 of GC. These initial doses were poorly tolerated, and the final two enrolled patients received a reduced lapatinib dose of 750 mg orally daily. However, reduction of the lapatinib dose did not result in improved tolerance or drug-delivery, and the trial was terminated early due to excessive toxicity. Grade 3/4 toxicities included diarrhea (33%), nausea/vomiting (33%), and thrombocytopenia (33%).

conclusionThe addition of lapatinib to GC as neoadjuvant therapy for MIBC was limited by excessive treatment-related toxicity. These findings highlight the importance of thorough dose-escalation investigation of combination therapies prior to evaluation in the neoadjuvant setting, as well as the limitations of determination of maximum tolerated dose for novel targeted combination regimens.

Indexed as

CystectomyAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCisplatinDeoxycytidineDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGemcitabineHumansLapatinibLymph Node ExcisionMaleMaximum Tolerated DoseMiddle AgedMuscle NeoplasmsNeoadjuvant TherapyCisplatinDeoxycytidineGemcitabineLapatinibQuinazolinesCystectomyDrug therapyEpidermal growth factor receptorMolecular targeted therapyUrothelial carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID26639198
PMCPMC4946374
OpenAlexW2184412158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.