<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bamias, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Aravantinos, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Deliveliotis, C.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bafaloukos, D.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kalofonos, C.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Xiros, N.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Zervas, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mitropoulos, D.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Samantas, E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pectasides, D.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Papakostas, P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gika, D.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kourousis, C.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Koutras, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Papadimitriou, C.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bamias, C.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kosmidis, P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimopoulos, M.A.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Docetaxel and cisplatin with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) versus MVAC with G-CSF in advanced urothelial carcinoma: A multicenter, randomized, phase III study from the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Clinical Oncology</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2004</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2004</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-1342268941&amp;doi=10.1200%2fJCO.2004.02.152&amp;partnerID=40&amp;md5=1bf9ac9390464e2297c95994fe3bef25</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">22</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">220 - 228</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Purpose: The combination of methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) represents the standard regimen for inoperable or metastatic urothelial cancer, but its toxicity is significant. We previously reported a 52% response rate (RR) using a docetaxel and cisplatin (DC) combination. The toxicity of this regimen compared favorably with that reported for MVAC. We thus designed a randomized phase III trial to compare DC with MVAC. Patients and Methods: Patients with inoperable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma; adequate bone marrow, renal, liver, and cardiac function; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2 were randomly assigned to receive MVAC at standard doses or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks. All patients received prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support. Results: Two hundred twenty patients were randomly assigned (MVAC, 109 patients; DC, 111 patients). Treatment with MVAC resulted in superior RR (54.2% v 37.4%; P = .017), median time to progression (TTP; 9.4 v6.1 months; P = .003) and median survival (14.2 v9.3 months; P = .026). After adjusting for prognostic factors, difference in TTP remained significant (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; P = .005), whereas survival difference was nonsignificant at the 5% level (HR, 1.31; P = .089). MVAC caused more frequent grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (35.4% v 19.2%; P = .006), thrombocytopenia (5.7% v 0.9%; P = .046), and neutropenic sepsis (11.6% v 3.8%; P = .001). Toxicity of MVAC was considerably lower than that previously reported for MVAC administered without G-CSF. Conclusion: MVAC is more effective than DC in advanced urothelial cancer. G-CSF-supported MVAC is well tolerated and could be used instead of classic MVAC as first-line treatment in advanced urothelial carcinoma. © 2004 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><notes><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cited By :135Export Date: 21 February 2017</style></notes></record></records></xml>