Search

Background: The proportion of patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that do not receive systemic anticancer treatment and the reasons for lack of treatment are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and overall survival of this patient group and reasons for omission of treatment. Material and methods: This retrospective, single-center cohort study from Rigshospitalet, Denmark included patients diagnosed with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma during the study period from 1 January 2010 to 31 March 2016 who did not receive systemic anticancer treatment. Patients were identified through the Danish Pathology Register and the electronic medical records. Results: 100 patients were included, representing 34% of all patients diagnosed with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma at Rigshospitalet during the study period. Lack of treatment was most often due to poor physical condition (59%), decreased renal function (15%), or patient preferences (14%). Median overall survival was 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.6–2.8 months). Conclusion: One in three patients diagnosed with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in the pre-immunotherapy era did not receive systemic anticancer treatment. Prompt identification of advanced disease and interventions to optimize these patients for treatment are essential. Our findings underscore the compelling need for novel, better tolerated treatment regimens in this frail patient group.

Background: Real-world treatment patterns and survival outcomes of locally advanced, unresectable, and metastatic urinary tract cancer (mUTC) patients have not previously been studied in a nationwide, population-based cohort. Objective: To describe treatment patterns and survival outcomes in mUTC patients treated in the real-world clinical setting. Design, setting, and participants: This nationwide, population-based study included all mUTC patients initiating first-line chemotherapy at Danish oncology departments from January 2010 to March 2016. Data were retrospectively obtained from electronic medical records. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Outcome measurements were descriptive. Kaplan-Meier was used for survival analysis. Results and limitations: Of 952 patients included in the study, 46.2% initiated standard gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) and 21.1% gemcitabine/carboplatin (CaG); the remaining patients initiated other treatment regimens. Median follow-up was 11.6 mo. The overall response rate and disease control rate were 43.0% and 61.7% in all patients, 51.4% and 69.1% in GC-treated patients, and 34.4% and 58.8% in CaG-treated patients, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was 11.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.8–12.5) mo in all patients, 14.0 (95% CI: 12.5–15.5) mo in GC-treated patients, and 9.8 (95% CI: 8.7–10.9) mo in CaG-treated patients. Limitations include the retrospective study design. Conclusions: Real-world mUTC patients are older and less fit than patients enrolled in clinical trials; despite this, tumor responses and survival are comparable. Survival in our patient cohort is also comparable with that reported from other real-world studies in this patient group. Patient summary: We studied treatment patterns and survival in urinary tract cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the real-world clinical practice. Survival in our patient cohort was comparable with that reported from clinical trials and other real-world studies