Practice patterns and outcomes of conventional versus split-dose cisplatin in neoadjuvant ddMVAC in bladder cancer

Bladder Cancer. 2025 Jan 31;11(1):23523735241310388. doi: 10.1177/23523735241310388. eCollection 2025 Jan-Mar.

Abstract

Background: The practice patterns and efficacy of ddMVAC administered with split-dose cisplatin for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) remains largely undefined.

Objective: To characterize the application and overall survival (OS) in patients with MIBC receiving conventional ddMVAC versus split-dosed ddMVAC and to examine the predictive variables in those receiving split-dosed cisplatin.

Methods: Using data from the CancerLinQ Discovery database, we identified 626 patients with bladder cancer between 2000-2023 with receipt of ddMVAC. The primary outcome was OS by receipt of split-dose versus conventional ddMVAC. A secondary outcome of interest assessed predictors of receipt of split-dose ddMVAC. Use of split-dose versus conventional ddMVAC was compared using chi-square tests. Univariate and multivariable OS were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Predictors of receipt of split dose versus conventional ddMVAC were estimated using logistic regression models.

Results: Most patients with MIBC are treated with standard dose ddMVAC. In multivariate analysis, no statistically significant difference in OS was observed between split-dose and conventional ddMVAC (HR 1.3, CI 0.78-2.18, p = 0.316). We demonstrate a notable decline in the use of split-dose cisplatin over time. Baseline GFR and performance status were not predictors of split-dosing in this cohort.

Conclusions: Most patients with MIBC received conventional ddMVAC with decreasing frequency of split-dose cisplatin use over time. We did not observe a difference in OS between patients with MIBC who received standard versus split-dose cisplatin.

Keywords: cisplatin; drug therapy; neoadjuvant therapy; urinary bladder neoplasms.