Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34355457›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2021

Efficacy of Platinum Rechallenge in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma After Previous Platinum-Based Chemotherapy for Metastatic Disease.

Risa L Wong, Lorin A Ferris, Olivia A Do, Sarah K Holt, Jorge D Ramos, Simon J Crabb, Cora N Sternberg, Joaquim Bellmunt, Sylvain Ladoire, Ugo De Giorgi and 9 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2021. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

19 authors at 14 institutions in 6 countries.

Risa L WongDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1658-9465
Lorin A FerrisDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Olivia A DoDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Sarah K HoltDepartment of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Jorge D RamosDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Simon J CrabbCancer Sciences Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Cora N SternbergEnglander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Joaquim BellmuntHospital Del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Sylvain LadoireGeorges-François Leclerc Cancer Center, Dijon, France.
Ugo De GiorgiIstituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori IRCCS, Meldola, Italy.
Lauren C HarshmanDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Ulka N VaishampayanKarmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Andrea NecchiFondazione IRCCS Instituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Sandy SrinivasStanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Sumanta K PalCity of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California, USA.
Guenter NiegischDepartment of Urology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Germany.
Tanya B DorffUniversity of Southern California Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Matthew D GalskyMount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.
Evan Y YuDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
University of Washington · USCentre Georges François Leclerc · FRCity of Hope · USCornell University · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · USFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEHospital Del Mar · ESIstituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori · ITMount Sinai Medical Center · USPalo Alto University · USUniversity of Southampton · GBUniversity of Southern California · USWayne State University · US

Funding

Cancer Research UK 25352
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFit patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) receive first-line platinum-based combination chemotherapy (fPBC) as standard of care and may receive additional later-line chemotherapy after progression. Our study compares outcomes with subsequent platinum-based chemotherapy (sPBC) versus subsequent non-platinum-based chemotherapy (sNPBC). MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients from 27 international centers in the Retrospective International Study of Cancers of the Urothelium (RISC) who received fPBC for mUC and at least two cycles of subsequent chemotherapy were included in this study. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model compared overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

resultsOne hundred thirty-five patients received sPBC and 161 received sNPBC. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, except patients who received sPBC had higher baseline hemoglobin, higher disease control rate with fPBC, and longer time since fPBC. OS was superior in the sPBC group (median 7.9 vs 5.5 months) in a model adjusting for comorbidity burden, performance status, liver metastases, number of fPBC cycles received, best response to fPBC, and time since fPBC (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.98; p = .035). There was no difference in PFS. More patients in the sPBC group achieved disease control than in the sNPBC group (57.4% vs 44.8%; p = .041). Factors associated with achieving disease control in the sPBC group but not the sNPBC group included longer time since fPBC, achieving disease control with fPBC, and absence of liver metastases.

conclusionAfter receiving fPBC for mUC, patients who received sPBC had better OS and disease control. This may help inform the choice of subsequent chemotherapy in patients with mUC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patients with progressive metastatic urothelial carcinoma after first-line platinum-based combination chemotherapy may now receive immuno-oncology agents, erdafitinib, enfortumab vedotin, or sacituzumab govitecan-hziy; however, those ineligible for these later-line therapies or who progress after receiving them may be considered for subsequent chemotherapy. In this retrospective study of 296 patients, survival outcomes and disease control rates were better in those receiving subsequent platinum-based rechallenge compared with non-platinum-based chemotherapy, suggesting that patients should receive platinum rechallenge if clinically able. Disease control with platinum rechallenge was more likely with prior first-line platinum having achieved disease control, longer time since first-line platinum, and absence of liver metastases.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Transitional CellUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsHumansPlatinumProgression-Free SurvivalRetrospective StudiesPlatinumAntineoplastic agentscarboplatinCisplatincombinationDrug therapyPlatinum compoundsUrinary bladder neoplasmsUrologic neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID34355457
PMCPMC8649023
OpenAlexW3190825795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.