Skip Navigation

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2001 93(13):973-975; doi:10.1093/jnci/93.13.973
© 2001 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Newman, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Newman, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 93, No. 13, 973-975, July 4, 2001
© 2001 Oxford University Press

NEWS

Bladder Cancer Chemotherapy Trial Generates More Questions Than It Answers

Laura Newman

Results from the long-awaited clinical trial testing neoadjuvant MVAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) plus radical cystectomy against the gold standard of cystectomy alone for locally advanced bladder cancer were hotly debated at the recent American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting.

The reason, in part, was that the results ran counter to findings from seven prior studies. A meta-analysis had shown no survival advantage with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. And some researchers found the trial’s study design, accrual rate, and associated toxic effects controversial.

The rationale behind using neoadjuvant (preoperative) MVAC was to help shrink the tumor. Investigators also thought it would be better tolerated than adjuvant . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Trial Design

Accrual Numbers

Toxicity


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?