throbber
British Journal of Cancer (1996) 74, 1655-1659
`© 1996 Stockton Press All rights reserved 0007-0920/96 $12.00
`
`Survival of patients with advanced urothelial cancer treated with cisplatin(cid:173)
`based chemotherapy
`
`SD Fossa\ C Sternberg2
`E Skovlund'
`
`, HI Scher\ CH Theodore\ B Meads, D Dearnaley6 JT Roberts 7 and
`
`lThe Norwegian Radium Hospital (NRH), Oslo, Norway; 2San Raffaele Scientific Institute (HSR), Rome, Italy; 3Memorial Sloan
`Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), New York, USA; 4Institute Gustave Roussy (IGR) , Vil/ejuif, France; 5Royal South Hants
`Hospital (RSHH) , UK; 6Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) , Sutton, Surrey, UK; 7Northern Centre/or Cancer Treatment (NCCT),
`Newcastle, UK.
`
`Summary The aim of the present retrospective study was to assess long-term survival after cisplatin-based
`chemotherapy in 398 patients with advanced urothelial transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) treated at seven
`international oncological units. Various combinations of cisplatin, methotrexate, vinblastine (or vincristine) and
`doxorubicin were used. The complete response rate according to the WHO criteria was 17%. Partial responses
`were obtained in 42% of the patients. The overall cancer-related 2 year and 5 year survival rates were 21 % and
`II % respectively. Based on multivariate analyses, a good prognosis group could be identified comprising
`patients with a good performance status with disease confined to lymph nodes (14%) or patients with T4b
`disease only. These patients had a 28% 5 year survival rate, which, in part, has to be related to post(cid:173)
`chemotherapy consolidation treatment in patients with pelvis-confined disease (radiotherapy, 26%; total
`cystectomy, II %). Fifteen patients died of chemotherapy-related complications and in 16% of the patients
`toxicity led to discontinuation of treatment. Modern cisplatin-based chemotherapy leads to long-term survival
`and cure of selected patients with advanced urothelial transitional cancer. In routine clinical practice,
`chemotherapy should be offered to good prognosis patients; those presenting with a good performance status
`and a non-metastasising T4b tumour or with metastases confined to lymph nodes. Post-chemotherapy
`consolidation treatment by surgery or radiotherapy should always be considered. Such chemotherapy requires
`oncological expertise in order to avoid unnecessary toxicity.
`
`Keywords: bladder cancer; metastasis; chemotherapy
`
`In the United States bladder cancer is the fifth most common
`cancer in men and the seventh in women, with an annual
`incidence of approximately 18 cases per 100000 or more than
`52 900 new cases per year, leading to II 700 deaths annually
`(American Cancer Society, 1996). The annual age-adjusted
`incidence in the Nordic countries is about 35 cases per
`100000, and the mortality 12 per 100000 (Engeland et al.,
`1993, 1995). Bladder cancer is primarily a disease of the
`elderly, with 80% of cases in the 50-79 year age group, and
`a peak incidence in the seventh decade. About 20 - 30% of all
`patients present with advanced bladder cancer [extension to
`the pelvic wall (T4b); metastatic disease (N +, M +)], while
`about 50% of all patients with muscle-invasive bladder
`cancer develop a pelvic recurrence or metastases during the
`course of their disease, despite curatively intended surgery or
`radiotherapy.
`Systemic chemotherapy has an uncertain role in
`the
`treatment of locally advanced recurrent metastatic urothelial
`transitional cell carcinoma (TCC). Anti-tumour activity has
`been demonstrated with several single agents, but does not
`prolong survival. Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy
`leads to response rates between 35% and 70% and is more
`effective than cisplatin alone (Sternberg et aI., 1989; Harker et
`al., 1985; Fossa et al., 1982; Loehrer et al., 1992). Typically,
`the response rates from single institution studies are superior
`to those from multicentre trials. Prolonged survival has been
`reported in patients who achieve complete response (CR)
`(Logothetis et al., 1985; Stoter et al., 1987; Sternberg et al.,
`1989). Systemic cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy
`can be toxic, particularly in elderly patients. The potential
`
`Correspondence: SO Fossa, The Norwegian Radium Hospital,
`Montebello, 0310 Oslo, Norway
`Received 9 April 1996; revised 31 May 1996; accepted 12 June 1996
`
`toxIcity must, therefore, be balanced against the expected
`beneficial effects, such as palliation of pain and, in particular,
`increase in life expectancy.
`The aim of the present paper is to analyse the survival in
`patients with advanced urothelial cancer of pure TCC type
`treated with cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy at six
`European centres (NRH, Norwegian Radium Hospital; IGR,
`Institute Gustave Roussy; RMH, Royal Marsden Hospital;
`NCCT, Northern Centre for Cancer Treatment; RSHH,
`Royal South Hants Hospital; HSR, San Raffaele Scientific
`Institute) and at one American hospital (MSKCC, Memorial
`Sloan Kettering Cancer Center). In addition, we examined
`which prognostic factors may assist the clinician in selecting
`those patients in whom long-term survival can be expected.
`
`Patients and methods
`
`The above six European and one American hospitals
`contributed the clinical data from 398 patients to this study
`(Table J). Patients with brain metastases at presentation were
`excluded. All patients had measurable locally advanced or
`metastatic urothelial cancer arising from the bladder, ureter
`or the renal pelvis. All patients had pure TCe. None of the
`patients had
`received chemotherapy before
`the study
`treatment. Fifty-three patients had T4b bladder cancer
`without prior treatment. Sixty-three patients had undergone
`total cystectomy before systemic chemotherapy. A further 79
`patients had been treated with pelvic radiotherapy with or
`without bladder-conserving surgery (TUR B; bladder wall
`resection). Pulmonary metastases were
`the only site of
`metastatic disease in 43 patients. Forty-nine patients had
`disease confined to lymph node sites. About two-thirds of the
`patients had a good performance status [WHO grade 0 or I
`(Miller et al., 1981)] at the start of chemotherapy.
`The European hospitals used a variety of cisplatin-contain(cid:173)
`ing combination chemotherapy regimens with cisplatin doses of
`
`West-Ward Exhibit 1034
`Fossa 1996
`Page 001
`
`

`

`1656
`
`Survival from advanced urothellal cancer
`SD Foss~ et a/
`
`70-100 mg m- 2 per cycle, administered every third week.
`These included CMV, cisplatin, methotrexate, vinblastine
`(Harker et ai., 1985); CMO, cisplatin, methotrexate, vincris(cid:173)
`tine; CM, cisplatin, methotrexate. Patients received between
`one and seven cycles of chemotherapy (median, three cycles)
`(Table II). At the MSKCC and in Rome, only M-VAC
`[methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, cisplatin (Sternberg et
`ai., 1988)] was used. In the patients treated at the MSKCC the
`median number of cycles was four (range I - 8).
`In the present report, response was defined according to the
`WHO criteria (Miller et ai., 1981). Complete remission, CR;
`partial remission, PR; no change, NC; progression, PD. In 34
`patients total cystectomy could be performed after cisplatin(cid:173)
`based chemotherapy. Post-chemotherapy radiotherapy was
`used in 88 patients. In particular, of the 245 patients with T4b
`disease or metastases confined to the pelvic lymph nodes, 28
`(11 %) and 64 (26%) underwent post-chemotherapy, total
`cystectomy and radiotherapy respectively. Forty-three patients
`received second-line alternative chemotherapy after failure of
`the initial chemotherapy regimen. A total of 109 patients were
`not given any further anti-cancer treatment after discontinua(cid:173)
`tion of cisplatin-based chemotherapy.
`
`Statistics
`A biostatistician (ES) performed procedures and tests using
`SPSS version 6.1 for Pc. The primary outcome variable was
`the start of
`the cancer-related actuarial survival from
`chemotherapy, evaluated by Kaplan-Meier estimates and
`the log-rank test. Cancer-related death was defined as death
`from or with urothelial cancer, including death during
`chemotherapy owing to complications from chemotherapy.
`A multi variable survival analysis was performed by the Cox
`proportional hazards model. Proportionality assumptions
`were checked and confirmed for the variables included. A
`P-value < 0.05 was regarded as statistically significant.
`
`Results
`
`At the end of the observation period (December 1994) and
`with a median follow-up of 51 months (range, 3-158
`months) 48 patients were alive and 350 were dead. Twelve
`of the surviving patients were alive with disease and 36
`patients were without evidence of urothelial cancer. Seven
`patients have died as a result of intercurrent diseases without
`evidence of urothelial cancer. In 343 patients death was
`cancer-related. In 53 of 340 evaluable patients (16%),
`to discontinuation of
`chemotherapy-induced toxicity
`led
`treatment. Complications of chemotherapy were the cause
`of death in IS (4%) of these patients. Three cancer-related
`deaths occurred more than 5 years after the initiation of
`chemotherapy. The cancer-related 2 year and 5 year survival
`rates were 21 % and II %, respectively, for all patients, with a
`median survival time of 11.3 months (Figure I).
`in 336 patients (Table III).
`Response was assessed
`Complete response was achieved in 17% [95% confidence
`interval (CI) 13-21 %] and partial response in 42% (95% CI
`37 -47%). In patients with lymph node metastases as their
`only site of disease, a 47% CR rate was reported (95% CI
`31-63%). Patients achieving a CR had a 38% 5 year survival
`rate (Figure 2).
`In the univariable analysis (Table IV) the median survival
`of patients with T4b tumours and those with disease confined
`either to lymph nodes or lung metastases was superior to that
`of patients with other or multiple sites of advanced disease.
`The 5 year survival rates were: patients with lymphatic
`metastases only, 18%; patients with T4b tumours, 25%;
`patients with lung metastases only, II %; patients with
`combined or alternative metastatic sites, 7% (Figure 3).
`Patients with a history of prior radiotherapy had a decreased
`survival compared with non-irradiated ones. Patients who
`had received M-VAC chemotherapy had a better outcome
`than those treated with non-M-VAC chemotherapy.
`
`The following pretreatment parameters were included in a
`multivariable analysis: performance status, site of disease (T4
`or lymph node metastases only vs all other alternatives) and
`age. Haemoglobin was excluded from this analysis as this
`factor may vary according to blood transfusion policy. The
`following independent good prognosis factors were con-
`
`Table I Patient characteristics
`
`No. of patients
`Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo
`Institute Gustave Roussy, Villejuif
`Northern Centre for Cancer Treatment,
`Newcastle
`Royal Marsden Hospital, London
`Royal South Hants Hospital, Southampton
`San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Rome
`Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center,
`New York
`Males/females
`Mean age at chemotherapy (years)
`Performance status (WHO)
`o
`I
`2
`3
`4
`Unknown
`Disease manifestation
`T4b bladder cancer only
`Lymph node metastases onll
`Lung metastases only
`Biochemistry
`Mean haemoglobin (gdr1r
`
`398
`76
`54
`
`33
`53
`53
`27
`
`\02
`326/72
`62 (23-80)"
`
`93
`176
`86
`27
`3
`13
`
`12.3
`(5.6-18.0)
`
`Previous treatment
`None or bladder-conserving surgeryd
`(without radiotherapy)
`Cystectomy
`Pelvic irradiation (with or without
`79
`bladder-conserving surgeryd)
`39
`Other
`15
`Unknown
`a Range. bpelvic, 27; extrapelvic, 22. cMissing for 41 patients.
`d Includes TUR B and partial cystectomy.
`
`202
`63
`
`Table II Chemotherapy
`
`3
`Cisplatin mono therapy
`83
`CMV
`188
`M~VAC
`30
`CMO
`46
`CM
`48
`Other
`C, cisplatin; M, methotrexate; V, vinblastine; A, doxorubicin
`(adriamycin); 0, vincristine (oncovin).
`
`1.0
`
`0.8
`
`~ 0.6
`(ij
`>
`.~ 0.4
`::I
`III
`
`0.2
`
`0.0
`
`o
`
`12
`
`96 108 120
`84
`72
`60
`48
`36
`24
`Months since chemotherapy start
`
`Figure 1 Cancer-related survival for all 398 patients.
`
`West-Ward Exhibit 1034
`Fossa 1996
`Page 002
`
`

`

`firmed: performance status 0/1; T4 or lymph node metastases
`only and age ~ 65 years. Combining the first two factors, a
`good prognosis group could be defined consisting of patients
`with a good performance status without visceral metastases.
`These patients represented about 20% of the patients from
`the present series (81 patients) and displayed a 5 year cancer(cid:173)
`related survival of 28% with a median survival rate of 20
`months (compared with 10 months in patients from the poor
`prognosis group) (Figure 4).
`In Table VI the proportion of good prognosis patients
`(performance status 0/1 and no visceral metastases) is given
`for each of the contributing institutions, showing a variability
`from 9-55%.
`
`Discussion
`
`In the last decade clinicians have become increasingly aware
`that TCC of the urothelial tract is responsive to combination
`chemotherapy. As TCC represents the vast majority of
`urothelial cancer seen in routine clinical practice, and for the
`sake of homogeneity, we have performed the present analysis in
`pure TCC only. The most commonly used regimens are the
`CMV (Harker et al., 1985) and the M-VAC combination
`(Sternberg et al., 1988). M -V AC has been shown to be superior
`to single-agent cisplatin (Loehrer et al., 1992) and to CISCA
`(Logothetis et aI., 1990) in randomised trials. No randomised
`trial has been performed comparing M-VAC and CMV.
`
`Table III Sites of disease and response rates
`No of assessed patients
`PIt
`CK'
`Total
`4 (14%)
`28
`14 (50%)
`18 (47%) 1\ (29%)
`38
`
`Site
`Lung metastases only
`Lymph node
`metastases only
`T4b tumour only
`Other metastatic
`sites/combinations
`Total
`57 (17%) 141 (42%)
`336
`a Complete response. b Partial response.
`
`46
`224
`
`16 (35%)
`10 (28%)
`25 (11%) 100 (45%)
`
`No
`response
`
`10
`9
`
`20
`99
`
`138
`
`Table IV Univariable analysis of pretreatment variables
`Median cancer-related
`survival months
`
`P-value
`
`)
`
`Variable
`Sites of disease
`T4 only
`Lymph nodes only
`Lung only
`Other combination
`Haemoglobin (gdl-I
`>12.0
`:;;;12.0
`Chemotherapy
`M-VAC
`Non-M-VAC
`Gender
`Males
`Females
`Age (years)
`:;;;65
`>65 years
`Performance status
`0/1
`2-4
`Previous radiotherapy
`Yes
`No/Unknown
`
`13.4
`15.0
`15.8
`9.8
`
`12.3
`8.3
`
`13.0
`9.0
`
`11.5
`10.8
`
`12.0
`9.8
`
`12.4
`8.1
`
`6.2
`12.0
`
`<0.0001
`
`<0.0001
`
`<0.0001
`
`0.37
`
`om
`
`0.01
`
`<0.0001
`
`1657
`
`Survival from advanced urothellai cancer
`SD FossA et al
`
`Response rates of 35 - 70% are reported in patients
`receiving M-VAC or CMV, with CR rates of 13-20%.
`These figures are confirmed in the present study. In the
`literature the median duration of response is reported to be
`about 9 months. As has been shown by other authors in
`single-institution studies, cisplatin-based chemotherapy
`is
`more effective in patients with nodal disease as compared
`with visceral disease [response rates, 71 % vs 40%; survival,
`33 months vs 12 months (Logothetis et al., 1985; Sternberg et
`al., 1989)]. In patients with visceral metastases, pulmonary
`lesions display the highest response rates, whereas hepatic
`and skeletal deposits are reported to be less responsive.
`Cisplatin-based chemotherapy of urothelial cancer repre(cid:173)
`sents a potentially curative treatment which, however, may be
`severely toxic in these often elderly patients who frequently
`present with concomitant medical problems and chronic
`diseases (Tannock et al., 1989; Fossa et al., 1992). In
`addition, owing to advanced age and the malignancy, renal
`
`1.0
`
`0.8
`
`~ 0.6
`(ij
`>
`.~ 0.4
`:::l
`(/)
`
`CR
`
`o
`
`12
`
`96 108 120
`84
`72
`60
`48
`36
`24
`Months since chemotherapy start
`
`to
`to response
`Figure 2 Cancer-related survival according
`cisplatin-based chemotherapy. CR, complete
`response
`(57
`patients); PR, partial response (141 patients); <CRjPR, no
`response (138 patients).
`
`1.0
`~ 0.8
`(ij 0.6
`>
`.~ 0.4
`:::l
`(/) 0.2
`
`0.0
`
`o
`
`12
`
`96 108 120
`84
`72
`60
`48
`36
`24
`Months since chemotherapy start
`
`Figure 3 Cancer-related survival according to site of disease. I,
`T4 only (53 patients); 2, metastases confined to lymph nodes (49
`patients); 3, lung metastases only (34 patients); 4, other sites or
`> I site (262 patients).
`
`1.0
`
`;;e 0.8
`!a.-
`m 0.6
`>
`.~ 0.4
`:::l
`(/)
`
`0.2
`
`0.0
`
`- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
`
`-L.. _________ _
`
`o
`
`12
`
`96 108 120
`84
`72
`60
`48
`36
`24
`Months since chemotherapy start
`
`Figure 4 Cancer-related survival in the good prognosis group.
`T4 only or disease confined to lymph nodes in patients with
`performance status 0 or I (--), as compared with all other
`patients (- - -).
`
`West-Ward Exhibit 1034
`Fossa 1996
`Page 003
`
`

`

`1658
`
`Table V Multivariable analysis of pretreatment variables
`
`Survival from advanced urothelial cancer
`SD Foss~ et at
`
`Variable
`
`Performance status
`0/1 vs 2-4
`Site of disease manifestation
`(T4b or lymph nodes
`only vs lung/others)
`Age (years)
`(>65 vs~65)
`
`Estimated hazard ratio
`(95% confidence
`interval)
`
`0.51 (0.40-0.65)
`
`P-value
`
`<0.0001
`
`0.53 (0.40-0.70)
`
`<0.0001
`
`1.32 (1.06-1.65)
`
`0.01
`
`Table VI Proportion of good prognosis patients treated at each
`hospital
`Good risk group
`(no. of patients)
`
`Hospital
`
`Total
`27
`75"
`36%
`NRH
`17%
`54
`IGR
`9
`9%
`5
`53
`RMH
`55%
`18
`NCCT
`33
`5
`53
`RSHH
`9%
`11%
`102
`MSKCC
`II
`HSR
`22%
`6
`27
`Total
`20%
`81
`397
`"Insufficient data for one patient. For abbreviations, see text.
`
`function is often reduced and commonly below the level
`required for cisplatin administration (glomerular filtration
`rate ~ 50 ml min -'). The application of careful hydration,
`modern antiemetics,
`the use of leucovorin (to prevent
`mucositis) and/or haematological growth factors (Grabri(cid:173)
`love et al., 1988) can reduce toxicity. Other cisplatin-based
`combination regimens have been introduced in the last
`decade in an attempt to reduce toxicity. This is also the
`background for the use of vincristine instead of vinblastine,
`or
`the substitution of epirubicin or mitosantrone for
`doxorubicin, or of carboplatin for cisplatin (St6ckle et al.,
`1992; Waxman et aI., 1989; Boccardo et al., 1994). Severe
`toxicity may, however, occur even among these carefully
`selected patients. Four per cent of our 398 patients died as a
`result of chemotherapy-related toxicity. Furthermore, 34 of
`292 evaluable patients (12%) received only one course of
`chemotherapy. Chemotherapy was discontinued owing to
`toxicity in 31 patients,
`to deterioration of the general
`condition in 14 or to patient refusal in 8. These figures are
`in accordance with published information on toxicity, and
`underline the need for careful consideration of the aims of
`therapy when initiating this type of chemotherapy in an
`individual patient.
`there are clearly beneficial effects of
`Nevertheless,
`cisplatin-based chemotherapy
`in patients with advanced
`urothelial cancer. Although the 5 year survival rate was
`only II %, patients with a good performance status and with
`disease confined to lymph nodes only or unresectable T4b
`bladder cancer may achieve long-term survival (> 3 years)
`
`References
`
`AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY. (1996). Facts and Figures.
`BOCCARDO F, PACE M, GUARNERI D, CANOBBIO L, CUROTTO A
`AND MARTORANA G. (1994). Carboplatin, methotrexate, and
`vinblastine in the treatment of patients with advanced urothelial
`cancer. A phase II trial. Cancer, 73, 1932 - 1936.
`DIMOPOULOS C, FINN LAND LOGOTHETIS CJ. (1995). Pattern of
`failure and survival of patients with metastatic urothelial tumors
`relapsing after cisplatin based chemotherapy. J. Urol., 151, 598-
`601.
`
`with a 28% 5 year survival rate. Inoperable patients may
`become operable following chemotherapy, as occurred in the
`31 patients who were able to undergo post-chemotherapy
`cystectomy. As radiotherapy is usually most effective in small
`tumours, preirradiation chemotherapy leading to tumour size
`reduction may increase the chance of radiocurability of a
`tumour in subgroups of patients. Our series thus supports the
`view that selected patients with technically inoperable pelvis(cid:173)
`confined tumours may benefit from consolidation treatment
`with surgery or radiotherapy after maximum response to
`chemotherapy (Dimopoulos et al., 1994; Miller et al., 1993).
`Other authors have reported the significance of prognostic
`factors during chemotherapy of urothelial cancer (Geller et
`al., 1991; Sengelf1Jv et al., 1994). At the MSKCC, favourable
`prognostic factors for survival in patients treated with M(cid:173)
`V AC included a good performance status, age > 60 years,
`and a normal serum alkaline phosphatase. Sengelf1Jw et al.
`(1994) confirmed the importance of a good performance
`status and of a normal alkaline phosphatase for long-term
`survival, and added normal serum creatinine to the list of
`good prognostic factors. In the Intergroup study, which
`compared M-VAC with cisplatin,
`the most
`important
`prognostic factors for favourable outcome were a good
`performance status, weight loss of < 10%, and lack of
`visceral metastases (Loehrer et al., 1992). Patients who had
`all three favourable factors had a 64% response and a
`median survival of 18 months. The present study confirms the
`favourable effect of good prognosis factors, such as a good
`performance status and lack of visceral metastases, as
`predictive parameters of long-term survival. Contrary to the
`report by Geller et al. (1991), younger patients from the
`present series had a better outcome than older ones. As
`reported by Stoter et al. (1987) and by Logothetis et al.
`(1985), patients with CR had the best survival, whereas PR
`was not related to a beneficial long-term survival. Jeffery and
`Mead (1992) suggested that patients with advanced ureteric
`or renal pelvis TCC represented a good prognostic group.
`Owing to lack of relevant information this factor could not
`be analysed in this study.
`The present study highlights the variability of selection
`factors for patients treated for advanced urothelial cancer at
`different oncological institutions. The heterogeneous distribu(cid:173)
`tion of prognostic factors among patients from different
`institutions may explain the variability of response rates
`recorded in the literature, and the need to stratify results
`according to prognostic factors.
`In conclusion, cisplatin-based chemotherapy
`is both
`feasible and efficacious in carefully selected patients with
`advanced urothelial cancer. The overall response rate is 59%
`(CR, 17%; PR, 42%) and the 5 year cancer-related survival is
`II %. Post-chemotherapy surgery or radiotherapy should
`the need for
`improved
`always be considered. There is
`chemotherapy regimens and, in particular, for the identifica(cid:173)
`tion of new effective drugs and drug combinations, including
`ifosfamide (Witte et al., 1993) and pac1itaxel (Roth, 1995).
`Patients with a good performance status and with disease
`confined to lymph nodes or with a T4b bladder cancer as
`their only disease site have a 28% 5 year survival rate.
`Cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced
`urothelial cancer requires oncological expertise in order to
`obtain optimal results and to avoid unnecessary toxicity.
`
`ENGELAND A, HALDORSEN T, TRETLI S, HAKULINEN T, HORTE
`LG, LOUSTARINENT, MAGNUS K, SCHOU G, SIGVALDASON H,
`STORM HH, TULINIUS HAND VAITTINEN P. (1993). Prediction
`of cancer incidence in the Nordic countries up to the years 2000
`and 2010: cancer of the urinary bladder. APMIS, 101,74-77.
`
`West-Ward Exhibit 1034
`Fossa 1996
`Page 004
`
`

`

`ENGELAND A, HALDORSEN T, TRETLI S, HAKULINEN T, HORTE
`LG, LUOSTARINEN T, SCHOU G, SIGVALDASON H, STORM HH,
`TULINIUS HAND VAITTINEN P. (1995). Prediction of cancer
`mortality in the Nordic countries up to the years 2000 and 20 I 0,
`on the basis of relative survival analysis: cancer of the urinary
`bladder. APMIS, 103,96-101.
`FossA SD, HARLAND SJ, KAYE SB, RAGHAVAN D, RUSSELL JM,
`PARMAR MKB, USCINSKA BM AND WOOD R FOR THE MRC
`SUBGROUP IN ADVANCED BLADDER CANCER. (1992). Initial
`combination chemotherapy with cisplatin, methotrexate and
`vinblastine in locally advanced transitional cell carcinoma.
`Response rate and pitfalls. Br. J. Urol., 70, 161-168.
`GABRILOVE JL, JAKUBOWSKI A, SCHER H, STERNBERG C, WONG
`G, GROUS J, YAGODA A, FAIN K, MOORE MAS, CLARKSON B,
`OETTGEN HF, ALTON K, WELTE K AND SOUZA L. (1988). Effect
`of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on neutropenia and
`associated morbidity due to chemotherapy for transitional-cell
`carcinoma of the urothelium. N. Engl. J. Med., 318, 1414-1422.
`GELLER NL, STERNBERG CN, PENENBERG D, SCHER HAND
`YAGODA A. (1991). Prognostic factors for survival of patients
`with advanced urothelial tumors treated with methotrexate,
`vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin chemotherapy. Cancer,
`67, 1525 -1531.
`HARKER WG, MEYERS FJ, FREIHA FS, PALMAR JM, SHORTLIFFE
`LD, HANNIGAN JF, MCWHIRTER KM AND TORTI FM. (1985).
`Cisplatin, methotrexate and vinblastine (CMV): an effective
`chemotherapy regimen for metastatic transitional cell carcinoma
`of the urinary tract. J. Clin. Oncol., 3, 1463-1470.
`JEFFERY GM AND MEAD GM. (1992). CMV chemotherapy for
`advanced transitional cell carcinoma. Br. J. Cancer, 66, 542 - 546.
`LOEHRER P, EINHORN LH, ELSON PJM, CRAWFORD D, KUEBLER
`P, TANNOCK L, RAGHAVAN D, STUART-HARRIS R, SAROSDY
`MF, LOWE BA, BLUMENSTEIN B AND TRUMP D. (1992). A
`randomized comparison of cisplatin alone or in combination with
`methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin in patients with
`metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a Cooperative Group Study. J.
`Clin. Oncol., 10, 1066-1073.
`LOGOTHETIS CJ, SAMUELS ML, OGDEN S, DEXEUS FH, SWANSON
`D, JOHNSON DE AND VON ESCHENBACH A. (1985) Cyclopho(cid:173)
`sphamide, doxorubicin and cisplatin chemotherapy for patients
`with locally advanced urothelial tumors with or without nodal
`metastases. J. Urol., 134,460-464.
`LOGOTHETIS CJ, DEXEUS F, FINN L, SELLA A, AMATO RJ, AYALA
`AG AND KILBOURN RG. (1990). A prospective randomized trial
`comparing CISCA
`to MVAC chemotherapy
`in advanced
`metastatic urothelial tumors. J. Clin. Oncol., 8, 1050 -1055.
`MILLER AB, HOOGSTRATEN B, STAQUET M AND WINKLER A.
`(1981). Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer, 47, 207-
`214.
`
`1659
`
`Survival from advanced urothelial cancer
`SD Fossa et a/
`
`MILLER RS, FREIHA FS, REESE JH, OZEN H AND TORTI FM. (1993).
`Cisplatin, methotrexate, and vinblastine plus surgical restaging
`for patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the
`urothelium. J. Urol., 150,65-69.
`ROTH BJ. (1995). Preliminary experience with paclitaxel in advanced
`bladder cancer. Semin. Oncol., 22, 1-5.
`SENGEL0V L, KAMBY C, SCHOU G AND VON DER MAASE H. (1994).
`Prognostic factors and significance of chemotherapy in patients
`with recurrent or metastatic transitional cell cancer of the urinary
`tract. Cancer, 74, 123-133.
`STERNBERG CN, Y AGODA A, SCHER HI, WATSON RC, HERR HW,
`MORSE MJ, SOGANI PC, VAUGHAN ED JR, BANDER N,
`WEISELBERG LR, GELLER N, HOLLANDER PS, LIPPERMAN R,
`FAIR WR AND WHITMORE WF JR. (1988). M-VAC (methotrex(cid:173)
`ate, vinblatine, doxorubicin and cisplatin) for advanced transi(cid:173)
`tional cell carcinoma of the bladder. J. Urol., 139,461-469.
`STERNBERG CN, YAGODA A, SCHER HI, WATSON RC, GELLER N,
`HERR HW, MORSE MJ, SOGANI PC, VAUGHAN ED, BANDER N,
`WEISELBERG L, ROSADO K, SMART T, SHIOUW-YUN L,
`PENENBERG D, FAIR WR AND WHITMORE WF. (1989).
`Methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin
`for
`advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium: efficacy
`and patterns of response and relapse. Cancer, 64, 2446 - 2458.
`STOCKLE M, MEYENBURG W, WELLEK S, VOGES G, GERTENBACH
`U, THUROFF JW, HUBER CH AND HOHENFLLNER R. (1992).
`Advanced bladder cancer (stages pT3b, pT4a, pNI and pN2):
`improved survival after radical cystectomy and 3 adjuvant cycles
`of chemotherapy. Results of a controlled prospective study. J.
`Urol., 148, 302 - 307.
`STOTER G, SPLINTER TA, CHILD JA, FossA SD, DENIS L, VAN
`OOSTEROM AT, DE PAUW M AND SYLVESTER R FOR THE
`EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR RESEARCH ON TREATMENT
`OF CANCER GENITO-URINARY GROUP. (1987). Combination
`chemotherapy with cisplatin and methotrexate in advanced
`transitional cell cancer of the bladder. J. Urol., 137,663 - 667.
`TANNOCK I, GOSPODAROWICZ M, CONNOLLY J AND JEWETT M.
`(1989). M-VAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and
`cisplatin) chemotherapy for transitional cell carcinoma: The
`Princess Margaret Hospital Experience. J. Urol., 142, 289-292.
`WAXMAN J, ABEL P, FARAH IN, O'DONOGHUE EPN, MEE D,
`(1989). New
`CO BECK R, SIKORA K AND WILLIAMS G.
`combination chemotherapy programme for bladder cancer. Br.
`J. Urol., 63, 68 - 71.
`WITTE R, LOEHRER P, DREICER R, WILLIAMS S AND ELSON P.
`(1993). Ifosfamide in advanced urothelial carcinoma: an ECOG
`trial (abstract 707). Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol., 12, 230.
`
`West-Ward Exhibit 1034
`Fossa 1996
`Page 005
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket