You have accessJournal of UrologyBladder Cancer: Invasive (I)1 Apr 20131439 A PROSPECTIVE STUDY TO EXAMINE THE AVAILABILITY OF THE PREDICTION SYSTEM OF NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY FOR MUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER Yoichiro Kato, Hitoshi Zembutsu, Ryo Takata, Kazuhiro Iwasaki, Wataru Obara, Yusuke Nakamura, and Tomoaki Fujioka Yoichiro KatoYoichiro Kato Morioka, Japan More articles by this author , Hitoshi ZembutsuHitoshi Zembutsu Sapporo, Japan More articles by this author , Ryo TakataRyo Takata Morioka, Japan More articles by this author , Kazuhiro IwasakiKazuhiro Iwasaki Morioka, Japan More articles by this author , Wataru ObaraWataru Obara Morioka, Japan More articles by this author , Yusuke NakamuraYusuke Nakamura Chicago, IL More articles by this author , and Tomoaki FujiokaTomoaki Fujioka Morioka, Japan More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.2793AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES We had previously established prediction system using microarray analyses for methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin (M-VAC), and carboplatin and gemcitabine (CaG) neoadjuvant chemotherapy for invasive bladder cancer. The accuracies of the M-VAC/CaG prediction systems were 90.5% (19/21) /94.7% (18/19), respectively. The efficacies of the M-VAC/CaG therapy also were 59.0% (23/39) /54.1% (20/37). Moreover, when we applied one prediction system as well as the other system for each other, we expected that 82.9% (63/76) would achieve tumor shrinking (>60%) by selection of either the M-VAC or CaG regimens. (Takata et al, Clin Cancer Res, 2005, Kato et al, Exp and Ther Med, 2011). Based on these results, we conducted the prospective study to confirm the accuracies of the two prediction systems. We also investigated whether use of prediction systems which were combined with M-VAC and CaG would increase the efficacy compare to each previous result. METHODS Twenty two patients were enrolled in this prospective study from Feb, 2011 to October, 2012. When we used the prediction systems which were consisted of M-VAC 14 and CaG 12 ‘predictive' gene sets, the prediction scores of M-VAC and CaG were calculated using real time PCR analysis within two weeks from tumor biopsy. Based on the results of the prediction scores, each patient was allocated to receiving M-VAC, CaG, Surgery or Radiation therapy. According to their responses to the neoadjuvant chemotherapy, we categorized the patients into two groups: ‘responders' who achieved significant tumor shrinking (>60%), and ‘non-responders' (≤60%) after two cycles. Patients were evaluated either ‘accurate' or ‘inaccurate' according to a tumor shrinkage rate cut off line of a 60% decrease after chemotherapies. RESULTS 6 patients were allocated to M-VAC, 13 to CaG, 2 to surgery and one to radiation based on the results of the prediction scores. The accuracies of M-VAC was 100% (6/6) and CaG was 76.9% (10/13). There was no significant difference between the total accuracy of prospective and previous results (84.2% vs. 92.5%, p = 0.325). The predicted responder were 72.7% (16/22) in this prospective study, it was larger than that of previous responded patients 59.0% in M-VAC and 54.1% in CaG. There was no significant differences compare to our previous expectation (82.9%; p=0.288). CONCLUSIONS The results of this prospective study were not inferior to the previous one. These prediction systems could be available to clinical use. © 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 189Issue 4SApril 2013Page: e589-e590 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Yoichiro Kato Morioka, Japan More articles by this author Hitoshi Zembutsu Sapporo, Japan More articles by this author Ryo Takata Morioka, Japan More articles by this author Kazuhiro Iwasaki Morioka, Japan More articles by this author Wataru Obara Morioka, Japan More articles by this author Yusuke Nakamura Chicago, IL More articles by this author Tomoaki Fujioka Morioka, Japan More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract