...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BJU international >Safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with muscle‐invasive bladder cancer and malignant ureteric obstruction
【24h】

Safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with muscle‐invasive bladder cancer and malignant ureteric obstruction

机译：Safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with muscle‐invasive bladder cancer and malignant ureteric obstruction

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相关主题

摘要

Objectives To determine whether patients with carcinoma invading bladder muscle (MIBC) and ureteric obstruction can safely receive cisplatin‐based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (C‐NAC), and to determine whether such patients require relief of obstruction with a ureteric stent or percutaneous nephrostomy prior to beginning C‐NAC. Patients and Methods We performed a single‐institution retrospective analysis of MIBC patients receiving C‐NAC and falling into three groups: no ureteric obstruction (NO); relieved ureteric obstruction (RO); and unrelieved ureteric obstruction (URO). To address whether patients with obstruction can safely receive C‐NAC, we compared patients with NO to those with RO, with the primary outcome of premature chemotherapy discontinuation. To investigate whether patients with obstruction should have the obstruction relieved prior to NAC, we compared RO to URO patients using a primary composite outcome of grade ≥ 3 adverse events, premature chemotherapy discontinuation, dose reduction, or dose interruption. The primary outcomes were compared using multivariable logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses were performed for the RO vs URO comparison, in which patients with only mild degrees of obstruction were excluded from the URO group. Results A total of 193 patients with NO, 49 with RO, and 35 with URO were analysed. There were no statistically significant differences between those with NO and those with RO in chemotherapy discontinuation (15 vs 22; P = 0.3) or any secondary outcome. There was no statistically significant difference between those with RO and URO in the primary composite outcome (51 vs 53; P = 1) or any secondary outcome. Conclusion Patients with ureteric obstruction can safely receive C‐NAC. Relief of obstruction was not associated with increased safety of C‐NAC delivery.

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号