A Phase 2 interventional study of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Bladder Cancer, sponsored by SWOG Cancer Research Network. Completed at 566 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-09-19.
Sponsored by SWOG Cancer Research Network · Phase 2, Interventional, and Treatment
The primary focus of this study is to see if looking at tumor biomarkers using a program called coexpression extrapolation or "COXEN" may predict a patient's response to chemotherapy before surgery.
The COXEN program will not select a patient's therapy, but the type of chemotherapy that he/she will receive will be randomly decided. The patient's response to chemotherapy will be used to test the usefulness of the COXEN program, which is the main goal of this trial. Other potential tests to predict a patient's response to chemotherapy will also be evaluated. In this study, the patient may receive the treatment in Arm 1 (gemcitabine and cisplatin) or the treatment in Arm 2 [methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, cisplatin, and filgrastim (or pegfilgrastim)]. There will be about 230 people taking part in this study (115 in each arm).
1,616 studies on the registry are indexed under Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; 421 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 237 is above the median of 60 across 1,163 interventional studies indexed under Urinary Bladder Neoplasms.
Browse Urinary Bladder Neoplasms studies →SWOG Cancer Research Network is the lead sponsor of 328 studies on the registry; 37 are open to participants now.
Of its 17 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 17 (100%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, IV, Days 1\&8, q 21 days x 4 cycles Cisplatin, 70 mg/m2, IV, Day 1, q 21 days x 4 cycles
Drug: Gemcitabine · Drug: Cisplatin
Methotrexate, 30 mg/m2, IV, Day 1, q 14 days x 4 cycles Vinblastine, 3 mg/m2, IV, Day 1 or 2, q 14 days x 4 cycles Doxorubicin, 30 mg/m2, IV, Day 1 or 2, q 14 days x 4 cycles Cisplatin, 70 mg/m2, IV, Day 1 or 2, q 14 days x 4 cycles Filgrastim, 5 mcg/kg, SubQ/IV, Days 3-7, q 14 days x 4 cycles
Drug: Cisplatin · Drug: Methotrexate · Drug: Vinblastine · Drug: Doxorubicin · Drug: Filgrastim
Gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, IV (in the vein) on Days 1 and 8 of each 21 day cycle. Number of Cycles: 4 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity develops.
Also known as: Gemzar
Cisplatin, 70 mg/m2, IV (in the vein) on Day 1 of each 21 day cycle (or Day 1 or 2 of each 14 day cycle). Number of Cycles: 4 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity develops.
Also known as: Platinol
Methotrexate, 30 mg/m2, IV (in the vein) on Days 1 of each 14 day cycle. Number of Cycles: 4 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity develops.
Also known as: Trexall
Vinblastine, 3 mg/m2, IV (in the vein) on Days 1 or 2 of each 14 day cycle. Number of Cycles: 4 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity develops.
Also known as: Velban
Doxorubicin, 30 mg/m2, IV (in the vein) on Days 1 or 2 of each 14 day cycle. Number of Cycles: 4 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity develops.
Also known as: Adriamycin
Filgrastim, 5 mcg/kg, SubQ/IV (in the vein) on Days 3-7 of each 14 day cycle. Number of Cycles: 4 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity develops.
Also known as: Neupogen
Assessment of Whether the Treatment-specific COXEN Score is Prognostic of pT0 Rate
The proportion of participants achieving pT0 in both favorable and unfavorable treatment specific-COXEN score categories. Unit of measure is the number of participants in each category that achieved pT0 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
Time frame: Up to 5 years post registration
Assessment of Whether the Treatment-specific COXEN Score is Prognostic of ≤ pT1 Rate
The proportion of participants achieving \<=pT1 in both favorable and unfavorable treatment specific-COXEN score categories. Unit of measure is the number of participants in each category that achieved \<= pT1 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
Time frame: up to 5 years post-registration
Assessment of COXEN Score as a Predictive Factor Distinguishing Between GC and ddMVAC
To assess in a hypothesis generating fashion, the ability of COXEN to select for an individual chemotherapy regimen (GC vs DDMVAC) P-values are reported as a measure of whether COXEN can select between GC/DDMVAC and to determine the significance of interactions between treatment specific COXEN scores and treatment arms in models predicting either pT0 or \<= pT1. Interactions with p-values \> 0.05 are interpreted as not significant. ________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
Time frame: up to 5 years post-registration
Correlation Between GC-and ddMVAC-COXEN Score
The Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients for GC-and ddMVAC-COXEN score were calculated and are reported below. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
Time frame: up to 5 years post-registration
Predictability of the CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) Score to Direct Which of the Two Regimens the Patient Should Receive: Gemcitabine+Cisplatin (GC) Versus Dose-dense Methotrexate, Vinblastin, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin (DDMVAC)
In addition to stratification factors and dichotomous COXEN GEM score, an indicator for treatment arm and the interaction of treatment arm with COXEN GEM score was also included in a logistic regression model. A significant interaction would suggest that the respective COXEN GEM score was able to differentiate whether a patient was more likely to respond to one chemotherapy regimen over another. \*note that this is the same objective at Primary Outcome #3 above - this was erroneously listed twice in the protocol.
Time frame: Up to 5 years post registration
Value of Gene Expression Profiling in Predicting Overall Survival (OS)
5-year OS curve was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Included all COXEN evaluable participants regardless of arm assignment. The report groups were favorable vs. unfavorable COXEN status.
Time frame: Up to 5 years post registration
Pathologic T0 Rate Evaluation: Gemcitabine+Cisplatin (GC) Versus Dose-dense Methotrexate, Vinblastin, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin (DDMVAC)
Pathologic complete response rate at the time of cystectomy following GC or DDMVAC treatment
Time frame: Up to 5 years post-registration
Number of Participants With Gr 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drugs
Adverse Events (AEs) are reported by CTCAE Version 4.0. Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported. Grade 3 is less severe than Grade 5. Grade 3 - Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL\* (bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications, and not bedridden). Grade 4 - Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5 - Death related to AE \*ADL- Activities of Daily Living
Time frame: Duration of treatment and follow up until death or 5 years post registration
| Milestone | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| Started | 120 | 117 |
| Completed | 115 | 112 |
| Not completed | 5 | 5 |
| Withdrew: Ineligible | 5 | 5 |
| Milestone | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| Started | 115 | 112 |
| Participants excluded from primary coxen analysis | 33 | 27 |
| Completed | 82 | 85 |
| Not completed | 33 | 27 |
| Withdrew: Inadequate tissue submitted | 5 | 6 |
| Withdrew: Insufficient amount of chemotherapy received | 15 | 8 |
| Withdrew: Pathologic response not evaluated | 13 | 13 |
The proportion of participants achieving pT0 in both favorable and unfavorable treatment specific-COXEN score categories. Unit of measure is the number of participants in each category that achieved pT0 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
| Participants | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| Favorable treatment-COXEN score | 8 | 10 |
| Unfavorable treatment-COXEN score | 20 | 17 |
The proportion of participants achieving \<=pT1 in both favorable and unfavorable treatment specific-COXEN score categories. Unit of measure is the number of participants in each category that achieved \<= pT1 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
| Participants | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| Favorable treatment-COXEN score | 10 | 16 |
| Unfavorable treatment-COXEN score | 30 | 31 |
To assess in a hypothesis generating fashion, the ability of COXEN to select for an individual chemotherapy regimen (GC vs DDMVAC) P-values are reported as a measure of whether COXEN can select between GC/DDMVAC and to determine the significance of interactions between treatment specific COXEN scores and treatment arms in models predicting either pT0 or \<= pT1. Interactions with p-values \> 0.05 are interpreted as not significant. ________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
| p-value | All Participants |
|---|---|
| P-value of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in model predicting pT0 | 0.88 |
| P-value of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in logistic regression model predicting <=pT1 | 0.43 |
| P-value of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in logistic regression model predicting pT0 | 0.66 |
| P-value of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in logistic regression model predicting <=pT1 | 0.85 |
The Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients for GC-and ddMVAC-COXEN score were calculated and are reported below. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The relationship of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (DDMVAC)- and gemcitabine+cisplatin (GC)- specific CO-eXpression ExtrapolatioN (COXEN) scores This will be done in two ways: * By assessing whether the treatment-specific COXEN score is prognostic of pT0 rate or ≤ pT1 in this patient population and to assess in a preliminary fashion whether the COXEN score is a predictive factor distinguishing between these two chemotherapy regimens. . * By evaluating the correlation between the GC- and the DDMVAC-COXEN score.
| correlation coefficient | All Participants |
|---|---|
| Pearson correlation coefficient | 0.385 |
| Spearman correlation coefficient | 0.386 |
In addition to stratification factors and dichotomous COXEN GEM score, an indicator for treatment arm and the interaction of treatment arm with COXEN GEM score was also included in a logistic regression model. A significant interaction would suggest that the respective COXEN GEM score was able to differentiate whether a patient was more likely to respond to one chemotherapy regimen over another. \*note that this is the same objective at Primary Outcome #3 above - this was erroneously listed twice in the protocol.
| p-value | All Participants |
|---|---|
| Pvalue of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in model predicting pT0 | 0.88 |
| Pvalue of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in model predicting <=pT1 | 0.43 |
| Pvalue of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in model predicting pT0 | 0.66 |
| Pvalue of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in model predicting <=pT1 | 0.85 |
5-year OS curve was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Included all COXEN evaluable participants regardless of arm assignment. The report groups were favorable vs. unfavorable COXEN status.
| Percent of Participants | All Participants |
|---|---|
| Favorable COXEN Status | 76 |
| Unfavorable COXEN Status | 71 |
Pathologic complete response rate at the time of cystectomy following GC or DDMVAC treatment
| percentage of participants | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| Pathologic T0 Rate Evaluation: Gemcitabine+Cisplatin (GC) Versus Dose-dense Methotrexate, Vinblastin, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin (DDMVAC) | 36 | 42 |
Adverse Events (AEs) are reported by CTCAE Version 4.0. Only adverse events that are possibly, probably or definitely related to study drug are reported. Grade 3 is less severe than Grade 5. Grade 3 - Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL\* (bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications, and not bedridden). Grade 4 - Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5 - Death related to AE \*ADL- Activities of Daily Living
| Participants | Gemcitabine and Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| Acute kidney injury | 0 | 1 |
| Alanine aminotransferase increased | 1 | 0 |
| Anemia | 10 | 9 |
| Bronchial infection | 0 | 1 |
| Cardiac arrest | 0 | 1 |
| Cardiac disorders - Other, specify | 1 | 0 |
| Chronic kidney disease | 2 | 1 |
| Creatinine increased | 0 | 5 |
| Dehydration | 0 | 2 |
| Diarrhea | 0 | 2 |
| Dizziness | 1 | 0 |
| Dyspnea | 1 | 0 |
| Enterocolitis infectious | 0 | 1 |
| Erectile dysfunction | 1 | 0 |
| Esophagitis | 0 | 1 |
| Fall | 0 | 1 |
| Fatigue | 3 | 5 |
| Febrile neutropenia | 2 | 2 |
| Headache | 0 | 1 |
| Heart failure | 0 | 1 |
| Hematuria | 0 | 1 |
| Hyperglycemia | 3 | 2 |
| Hyperkalemia | 2 | 0 |
| Hypertension | 1 | 3 |
| Hypocalcemia | 0 | 1 |
| Hypokalemia | 0 | 3 |
| Hypomagnesemia | 0 | 2 |
| Hyponatremia | 5 | 2 |
| Hypophosphatemia | 1 | 0 |
| Infections and infestations - Other, specify | 0 | 3 |
| Insomnia | 0 | 1 |
| Investigations - Other, specify | 0 | 1 |
| Kidney infection | 1 | 0 |
| Lung infection | 0 | 1 |
| Lymphocyte count decreased | 2 | 3 |
| Mucositis oral | 0 | 5 |
| Nausea | 1 | 3 |
| Neutrophil count decreased | 20 | 10 |
| Phlebitis infective | 1 | 0 |
| Platelet count decreased | 11 | 5 |
| Proteinuria | 1 | 0 |
| Renal and urinary disorders - Other, specify | 1 | 0 |
| Sepsis | 0 | 1 |
| Syncope | 1 | 1 |
| Thromboembolic event | 4 | 1 |
| Tinnitus | 1 | 0 |
| Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage | 0 | 1 |
| Urinary tract infection | 4 | 3 |
| Urinary tract obstruction | 1 | 1 |
| Vestibular disorder | 0 | 1 |
| Vomiting | 0 | 3 |
| White blood cell decreased | 5 | 6 |
Collected over Duration of treatment and follow up until death or 5 years post registration. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemcitabine and Cisplatin | 28/115 (24.3%) | 1/115 (0.9%) | 112/115 (97.4%) |
| Dose Dense MVAC | 25/112 (22.3%) | 4/112 (3.6%) | 108/112 (96.4%) |
| Event | Gemcitabine and Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| Infections and infestations-OtherInfections and infestations | 0/115 | 2/112 |
| Febrile neutropeniaBlood and lymphatic system disorders | 0/115 | 1/112 |
| Cardiac arrestCardiac disorders | 1/115 | 1/112 |
| Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhageGastrointestinal disorders | 0/115 | 1/112 |
| Sudden death NOSGeneral disorders | 0/115 | 1/112 |
| SepsisInfections and infestations | 0/115 | 1/112 |
| Event | Gemcitabine and Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC |
|---|---|---|
| AnemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders | 83/115 | 69/112 |
| FatigueGeneral disorders | 82/115 | 77/112 |
| NauseaGastrointestinal disorders | 65/115 | 72/112 |
| Platelet count decreasedInvestigations | 50/115 | 37/112 |
| AlopeciaSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | 19/115 | 48/112 |
| ConstipationGastrointestinal disorders | 47/115 | 46/112 |
| Neutrophil count decreasedInvestigations | 44/115 | 15/112 |
| White blood cell decreasedInvestigations | 42/115 | 14/112 |
| Mucositis oralGastrointestinal disorders | 12/115 | 39/112 |
| HypomagnesemiaMetabolism and nutrition disorders | 35/115 | 38/112 |
All eligible participants
| Age, Continuous(years) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median | 64.9 (34.5 to 79.2) | 64.8 (33.1 to 86.5) | 64.8 (33.1 to 86.5) |
| Sex: Female, Male(Participants) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 23 | 13 | 36 |
| Male | 92 | 99 | 191 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hispanic or Latino | 7 | 5 | 12 |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 104 | 105 | 209 |
| Unknown or Not Reported | 4 | 2 | 6 |
| Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Asian | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Black or African American | 7 | 1 | 8 |
| White | 94 | 107 | 201 |
| More than one race | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unknown or Not Reported | 10 | 2 | 12 |
| Clinical stage(Participants) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| T2 | 102 | 98 | 200 |
| T3 or T4a | 13 | 14 | 27 |
| Zubrod performance status(Participants) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 88 | 86 | 174 |
| 1 | 27 | 26 | 53 |
| GC-COXEN score(Participants) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Favorable | 18 | 25 | 43 |
| Not favorable | 64 | 60 | 124 |
| ddMVAC-COXEN score(Participants) | Gemcitabine & Cisplatin | Dose Dense MVAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Favorable | 23 | 30 | 53 |
| Not Favorable | 59 | 55 | 114 |
Showing the first 100 of 566 sites.
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
Plan to share: Yes — Select individual patient-level data from this trial can be requested from the NCTN/NCORP Data Archive
This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
SWOG Cancer Research Network