CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02177695COXENUpdated Sep 19, 2024Results posted

S1314, Co-expression Extrapolation (COXEN) Program to Predict Chemotherapy Response in Patients With Bladder Cancer

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

Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
237
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

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.

Read the detailed description

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).

02

Conditions studied

  • Bladder Cancer

Keywords

  • Bladder Cancer
  • Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
  • Coexpression Extrapolation
  • COXEN
  • S1314
  • SWOG
03

In context

Urinary Bladder Neoplasms

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 →

Lead sponsor

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.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Histologically proven bladder cancer (pure small cell carcinoma, pure adenocarcinoma, and pure squamous cell carcinoma histologies are excluded).
  • Stage cT2-T4a N0 M0 disease.
  • Documented muscle invasive disease with at least one of the following: disease measuring at least 10 mm on cross-sectional imaging OR the presence of tumor-associated hydronephrosis.
  • Staging scans with abdominal/pelvic CT or MRI scan and CT scan or x-ray of the chest within 56 days prior to registration. If alkaline phosphatase is above the treating institution's upper limit of normal (ULN), presence of suspicious bone pain, or if other clinical suspicion, a whole body bone scan is required within 56 days prior to registration.
  • Performance status = 0 or 1
  • 18 years of age or older
  • Must have tumor tissue from transurethral resection of the bladder tumor (TURBT) available for submission that is sufficient for COXEN testing and must agree to submission of 20 (10 micron) slides plus 2 (5 micron) slides from the start and end of the 20 slides for a total of 22 unstained slides.
  • Must agree to collection of tissue (if residual disease is present), urine, and whole blood.
  • Must agree to participate in the translational medicine studies outlined in the protocol

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Prior systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy or systemic anthracycline
  • Peripheral neuropathy >/= Grade 2
  • Class III/IV heart failure or known left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) \< 50%
  • Clinically relevant hearing impairment > Grade 2
  • Renal function, calculated creatinine clearance \< 60 mL/min
  • Hepatic function, total bilirubin > 1.5 x institutional upper limit of normal (IULN) (or > 2.5 x IULN with Gilbert's disease); AST \& ALT > 2 X IULN
  • Hematologic function, absolute neutrophil count (ANC) \< 1,500/mcL, hemoglobin \< 9 g/dL, and platelets \< 100,000/mcL
  • Hypersensitivity to cisplatin, gemcitabine, doxorubicin, vinblastine, methotrexate, or filgrastim/pegfilgrastim
  • Incidence of or uncontrolled medical illness (e.g. active cardiac symptoms, active systemic infection, etc.)
  • Pregnant or nursing females
  • No other prior malignancy is allowed except for the following: adequately treated basal cell or squamous cell skin cancer, in situ cervical cancer, adequately treated Stage I or II cancer from which the patient is currently in complete remission, or any other cancer from which the patient has been disease free for five years. However, patients with localized prostate cancer who are being followed by an active surveillance program are eligible.
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
237 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Gemcitabine & Cisplatin

    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

  • Experimental
    Dose Dense MVAC

    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

Interventions

  • DrugGemcitabine

    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

  • DrugCisplatin

    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

  • DrugMethotrexate

    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

  • DrugVinblastine

    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

  • DrugDoxorubicin

    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

  • DrugFilgrastim

    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

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

Secondary outcomes

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

07

Results

Posted Jan 3, 2022

Participant flow

ITT Analysis
Participant flow — ITT Analysis
MilestoneGemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
Started120117
Completed115112
Not completed55
Withdrew: Ineligible55
Primary COXEN Analysis
Participant flow — Primary COXEN Analysis
MilestoneGemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
Started115112
Participants excluded from primary coxen analysis3327
Completed8285
Not completed3327
Withdrew: Inadequate tissue submitted56
Withdrew: Insufficient amount of chemotherapy received158
Withdrew: Pathologic response not evaluated1313

Outcome measures

PrimaryAssessment 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
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Assessment of Whether the Treatment-specific COXEN Score is Prognostic of pT0 Rate
ParticipantsGemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
Favorable treatment-COXEN score810
Unfavorable treatment-COXEN score2017
Statistical analysis
  • Gemcitabine & Cisplatin · Regression, Logistic · p = 0.1 · Odds ratio (or): 2.63 · 95% CI 0.82 to 8.36
  • Dose Dense MVAC · Regression, Logistic · p = 0.82 · Odds ratio (or): 1.12 · 95% CI 0.42 to 2.95
PrimaryAssessment 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
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Assessment of Whether the Treatment-specific COXEN Score is Prognostic of ≤ pT1 Rate
ParticipantsGemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
Favorable treatment-COXEN score1016
Unfavorable treatment-COXEN score3031
Statistical analysis
  • Gemcitabine & Cisplatin · Regression, Logistic · p = 0.02 · Odds ratio (or): 2.33 · 95% CI 1.11 to 4.89
  • Dose Dense MVAC · Regression, Logistic · p = 0.76 · Odds ratio (or): 0.90 · 95% CI 0.46 to 1.75
PrimaryAssessment 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
Reported as:
Number · p-value
Assessment of COXEN Score as a Predictive Factor Distinguishing Between GC and ddMVAC
p-valueAll Participants
P-value of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in model predicting pT00.88
P-value of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in logistic regression model predicting <=pT10.43
P-value of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in logistic regression model predicting pT00.66
P-value of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in logistic regression model predicting <=pT10.85
PrimaryCorrelation 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
Reported as:
Number · correlation coefficient
Correlation Between GC-and ddMVAC-COXEN Score
correlation coefficientAll Participants
Pearson correlation coefficient0.385
Spearman correlation coefficient0.386
SecondaryPredictability 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
Reported as:
Number · p-value
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)
p-valueAll Participants
Pvalue of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in model predicting pT00.88
Pvalue of interaction term (GCscore*treatment arm) in model predicting <=pT10.43
Pvalue of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in model predicting pT00.66
Pvalue of interaction term (MVACscore*treatment arm) in model predicting <=pT10.85
SecondaryValue 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
Reported as:
Number · Percent of Participants
Value of Gene Expression Profiling in Predicting Overall Survival (OS)
Percent of ParticipantsAll Participants
Favorable COXEN Status76
Unfavorable COXEN Status71
SecondaryPathologic 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
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Pathologic T0 Rate Evaluation: Gemcitabine+Cisplatin (GC) Versus Dose-dense Methotrexate, Vinblastin, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin (DDMVAC)
percentage of participantsGemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
Pathologic T0 Rate Evaluation: Gemcitabine+Cisplatin (GC) Versus Dose-dense Methotrexate, Vinblastin, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin (DDMVAC)3642
SecondaryNumber 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
Reported as:
Number · Participants
Number of Participants With Gr 3 Through 5 Adverse Events That Are Related to Study Drugs
ParticipantsGemcitabine and CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
Acute kidney injury01
Alanine aminotransferase increased10
Anemia109
Bronchial infection01
Cardiac arrest01
Cardiac disorders - Other, specify10
Chronic kidney disease21
Creatinine increased05
Dehydration02
Diarrhea02
Dizziness10
Dyspnea10
Enterocolitis infectious01
Erectile dysfunction10
Esophagitis01
Fall01
Fatigue35
Febrile neutropenia22
Headache01
Heart failure01
Hematuria01
Hyperglycemia32
Hyperkalemia20
Hypertension13
Hypocalcemia01
Hypokalemia03
Hypomagnesemia02
Hyponatremia52
Hypophosphatemia10
Infections and infestations - Other, specify03
Insomnia01
Investigations - Other, specify01
Kidney infection10
Lung infection01
Lymphocyte count decreased23
Mucositis oral05
Nausea13
Neutrophil count decreased2010
Phlebitis infective10
Platelet count decreased115
Proteinuria10
Renal and urinary disorders - Other, specify10
Sepsis01
Syncope11
Thromboembolic event41
Tinnitus10
Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage01
Urinary tract infection43
Urinary tract obstruction11
Vestibular disorder01
Vomiting03
White blood cell decreased56

Adverse events

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.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Gemcitabine and Cisplatin28/115 (24.3%)1/115 (0.9%)112/115 (97.4%)
Dose Dense MVAC25/112 (22.3%)4/112 (3.6%)108/112 (96.4%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventGemcitabine and CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
Infections and infestations-OtherInfections and infestations0/1152/112
Febrile neutropeniaBlood and lymphatic system disorders0/1151/112
Cardiac arrestCardiac disorders1/1151/112
Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhageGastrointestinal disorders0/1151/112
Sudden death NOSGeneral disorders0/1151/112
SepsisInfections and infestations0/1151/112
Most frequent other events
Showing 10 of 211
Most frequent other events
EventGemcitabine and CisplatinDose Dense MVAC
AnemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders83/11569/112
FatigueGeneral disorders82/11577/112
NauseaGastrointestinal disorders65/11572/112
Platelet count decreasedInvestigations50/11537/112
AlopeciaSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders19/11548/112
ConstipationGastrointestinal disorders47/11546/112
Neutrophil count decreasedInvestigations44/11515/112
White blood cell decreasedInvestigations42/11514/112
Mucositis oralGastrointestinal disorders12/11539/112
HypomagnesemiaMetabolism and nutrition disorders35/11538/112

Baseline characteristics

All eligible participants

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
Median64.9 (34.5 to 79.2)64.8 (33.1 to 86.5)64.8 (33.1 to 86.5)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
Female231336
Male9299191
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
Hispanic or Latino7512
Not Hispanic or Latino104105209
Unknown or Not Reported426
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native011
Asian415
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American718
White94107201
More than one race000
Unknown or Not Reported10212
Clinical stage
Clinical stage(Participants)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
T210298200
T3 or T4a131427
Zubrod performance status
Zubrod performance status(Participants)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
08886174
1272653
GC-COXEN score
GC-COXEN score(Participants)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
Favorable182543
Not favorable6460124
ddMVAC-COXEN score
ddMVAC-COXEN score(Participants)Gemcitabine & CisplatinDose Dense MVACTotal
Favorable233053
Not Favorable5955114
08

Study locations

566 sites
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center
    Birmingham, Alabama 35233, United States
  • Fairbanks Memorial Hospital
    Fairbanks, Alaska 99701, United States
  • University of Arizona Cancer Center at Saint Joseph's
    Phoenix, Arizona 85004, United States
  • University of Arizona Cancer Center-Orange Grove Campus
    Tucson, Arizona 85704, United States
  • University of Arizona Cancer Center-North Campus
    Tucson, Arizona 85719, United States
  • The University of Arizona Medical Center-University Campus
    Tucson, Arizona 85724, United States
  • Yuma Cancer Center
    Yuma, Arizona 85364, United States
  • Fowler Family Center for Cancer Care
    Jonesboro, Arkansas 72401, United States
  • AIS Cancer Center at San Joaquin Community Hospital
    Bakersfield, California 93301, United States
  • City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center
    Duarte, California 91010, United States
  • UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center
    La Jolla, California 92093, United States
  • City of Hope Antelope Valley
    Lancaster, California 93534, United States
  • Loma Linda University Medical Center
    Loma Linda, California 92354, United States
  • Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center
    Los Angeles, California 90033, United States
  • USC / Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center
    Los Angeles, California 90033, United States
  • Cedars Sinai Medical Center
    Los Angeles, California 90048, United States
  • Fremont - Rideout Cancer Center
    Marysville, California 95901, United States
  • USC Norris Oncology/Hematology-Newport Beach
    Newport Beach, California 92663, United States
  • Stanford Cancer Institute
    Palo Alto, California 94304, United States
  • PCR Oncology
    Pismo Beach, California 93449, United States
  • University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center
    Sacramento, California 95817, United States
  • Stanford Cancer Center South Bay
    San Jose, California 95124, United States
  • City of Hope South Pasadena
    South Pasadena, California 91030, United States
  • Gene Upshaw Memorial Tahoe Forest Cancer Center
    Truckee, California 96161, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Aurora
    Aurora, Colorado 80012, United States
  • The Medical Center of Aurora
    Aurora, Colorado 80012, United States
  • University of Colorado Cancer Center - Anschutz Cancer Pavilion
    Aurora, Colorado 80045, United States
  • Boulder Community Hospital
    Boulder, Colorado 80301, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Boulder
    Boulder, Colorado 80304, United States
  • Penrose-Saint Francis Healthcare
    Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Penrose
    Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907, United States
  • Memorial Hospital Central
    Colorado Springs, Colorado 80909, United States
  • Denver Health Medical Center
    Denver, Colorado 80204, United States
  • National Jewish Health-Main Campus
    Denver, Colorado 80206, United States
  • The Women's Imaging Center
    Denver, Colorado 80209, United States
  • Porter Adventist Hospital
    Denver, Colorado 80210, United States
  • Colorado Blood Cancer Institute
    Denver, Colorado 80218, United States
  • Presbyterian - Saint Lukes Medical Center - Health One
    Denver, Colorado 80218, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Midtown
    Denver, Colorado 80218, United States
  • SCL Health Saint Joseph Hospital
    Denver, Colorado 80218, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Rose
    Denver, Colorado 80220, United States
  • Rose Medical Center
    Denver, Colorado 80220, United States
  • Colorado Cancer Research Program NCORP
    Denver, Colorado 80222, United States
  • Mercy Medical Center
    Durango, Colorado 81301, United States
  • Southwest Oncology PC
    Durango, Colorado 81301, United States
  • Comprehensive Cancer Care and Research Institute of Colorado LLC
    Englewood, Colorado 80113, United States
  • Swedish Medical Center
    Englewood, Colorado 80113, United States
  • Poudre Valley Hospital
    Fort Collins, Colorado 80524, United States
  • Mountain Blue Cancer Care Center
    Golden, Colorado 80401, United States
  • National Jewish Health-Western Hematology Oncology
    Golden, Colorado 80401, United States
  • Grand Valley Oncology
    Grand Junction, Colorado 81501, United States
  • North Colorado Medical Center
    Greeley, Colorado 80631, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Greenwood Village
    Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Lakewood
    Lakewood, Colorado 80228, United States
  • Saint Anthony Hospital
    Lakewood, Colorado 80228, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Littleton
    Littleton, Colorado 80120, United States
  • Littleton Adventist Hospital
    Littleton, Colorado 80122, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Sky Ridge
    Lone Tree, Colorado 80124, United States
  • Sky Ridge Medical Center
    Lone Tree, Colorado 80124, United States
  • Longmont United Hospital
    Longmont, Colorado 80501, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Longmont
    Longmont, Colorado 80501, United States
  • McKee Medical Center
    Loveland, Colorado 80539, United States
  • Parker Adventist Hospital
    Parker, Colorado 80138, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Parker
    Parker, Colorado 80138, United States
  • Saint Mary Corwin Medical Center
    Pueblo, Colorado 81004, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers - Pueblo
    Pueblo, Colorado 81008, United States
  • Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers-Thornton
    Thornton, Colorado 80260, United States
  • SCL Health Lutheran Medical Center
    Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033, United States
  • Greenwich Hospital
    Greenwich, Connecticut 06830, United States
  • Smilow Cancer Hospital Care Center at Saint Francis
    Hartford, Connecticut 06105, United States
  • Yale University
    New Haven, Connecticut 06520, United States
  • Beebe Medical Center
    Lewes, Delaware 19958, United States
  • Christiana Gynecologic Oncology LLC
    Newark, Delaware 19713, United States
  • Delaware Clinical and Laboratory Physicians PA
    Newark, Delaware 19713, United States
  • Helen F Graham Cancer Center
    Newark, Delaware 19713, United States
  • Medical Oncology Hematology Consultants PA
    Newark, Delaware 19713, United States
  • Regional Hematology and Oncology PA
    Newark, Delaware 19713, United States
  • Christiana Care Health System-Christiana Hospital
    Newark, Delaware 19718, United States
  • Beebe Health Campus
    Rehoboth Beach, Delaware 19971, United States
  • Nanticoke Memorial Hospital
    Seaford, Delaware 19973, United States
  • Christiana Care Health System-Wilmington Hospital
    Wilmington, Delaware 19801, United States
  • Sibley Memorial Hospital
    Washington, District of Columbia 20016, United States
  • Cleveland Clinic-Weston
    Weston, Florida 33331, United States
  • John B Amos Cancer Center
    Columbus, Georgia 31904, United States
  • Medical Center of Central Georgia
    Macon, Georgia 31201, United States
  • Hawaii Oncology Inc-Pali Momi
    'Aiea, Hawaii 96701, United States
  • Pali Momi Medical Center
    'Aiea, Hawaii 96701, United States
  • The Cancer Center of Hawaii-Leeward
    'Ewa Beach, Hawaii 96706, United States
  • Hawaii Cancer Care Inc-POB II
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States
  • Hawaii Oncology Inc-POB I
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States
  • Island Urology
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States
  • Queen's Medical Center
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States
  • Straub Clinic and Hospital
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States
  • University of Hawaii Cancer Center
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96813, United States
  • Hawaii Cancer Care Inc-Liliha
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96817, United States
  • Hawaii Oncology Inc-Kuakini
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96817, United States
  • Kuakini Medical Center
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96817, United States
  • The Cancer Center of Hawaii-Liliha
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96817, United States
  • Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children
    Honolulu, Hawaii 96826, United States
  • Wilcox Memorial Hospital and Kauai Medical Clinic
    Lihue, Hawaii 96766, United States

Showing the first 100 of 566 sites.

09

References and documents

Publications

  • Flaig TW, Tangen CM, Daneshmand S, Alva A, Lerner SP, Lucia MS, McConkey DJ, Theodorescu D, Goldkorn A, Milowsky MI, Bangs R, MacVicar GR, Bastos BR, Fowles JS, Gustafson DL, Plets M, Thompson IM Jr. A Randomized Phase II Study of Coexpression Extrapolation (COXEN) with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Bladder Cancer (SWOG S1314; NCT02177695). Clin Cancer Res. 2021 May 1;27(9):2435-2441. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-2409. Epub 2021 Feb 10. PubMed 33568346 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol, analysis plan and consent form · Jul 15, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Select individual patient-level data from this trial can be requested from the NCTN/NCORP Data Archive

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 19, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02177695
Lead sponsor
SWOG Cancer Research Network
Collaborators
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jun 30, 2014
Start date
Aug 28, 2014
Primary completion
Feb 2020
Completion
Dec 1, 2022
Results posted
Jan 3, 2022
Last update
Sep 19, 2024

Study contacts

Thomas W. Flaig, M.D.
study chair · University of Colorado, Denver

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions 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.

Start the discussion