Effect of UFT on treatment of urological cancer--effect of UFT on treatment of invasive bladder cancer and advanced prostate cancer. Ibaraki Urological Cancer Chemotherapy Study Group

• Published in: Gan to kagaku ryoho Vol. 25; no. 8; p. 1179
• Main Authors: Uchida, K, Takeshima, H, Kikuchi, K, Shimazui, T, Miyanaga, N, Kawai, K, Akaza, H, Tsuchiya, A, Noguchi, R, Hattori, K, Manabe, F, Matsuki, K, Suzuki, R, Ishikawa, S, Kondo, F, Kobayashi, T, Koiso, K
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Japanese
• Published: Japan 01.07.1998
• Subjects: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Androgen Antagonists - administration & dosage; Antineoplastic Agents - administration & dosage; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - administration & dosage; Carcinoma, Transitional Cell - drug therapy; Carcinoma, Transitional Cell - radiotherapy; Carcinoma, Transitional Cell - surgery; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Diethylstilbestrol - administration & dosage; Diethylstilbestrol - analogs & derivatives; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Combinations; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prognosis; Prospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms - drug therapy; Tegafur - administration & dosage; Uracil - administration & dosage; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms - drug therapy; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms - surgery
• ISSN: 0385-0684

A prospective randomized joint study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of UFT 1) as a postoperative adjuvant therapy in patients with invasive bladder cancer who had undergone curative combination therapy with operation and/or chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy, 2) as an endocrine chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed stage C/D prostate cancer, for a period of 3 years from January, 1992. For bladder cancer, of 36 patients with invasive bladder cancer, clinically cured by combination therapy, 20 patients were treated with UFT as an adjuvant chemotherapy over 12 months, and they were compared to 16 patients with no adjuvant therapy. After excluding 10 inappropriate patients, 12 patients in the UFT treatment group and 14 patients with no adjuvant treatment group were observed. For prostate cancer, of 29 patients with clinically stage C/D prostate cancer, 13 were treated with endocrine therapy in combination with UFT, and 16 patients were treated with endocrine therapy alone. After excluding 7 inappropriate patients, 10 patients with endocrine chemotherapy and 12 patients with hormonal therapy were observed. The non-recurrence rate, survival rate and side effects of UFT were evaluated. In the study of bladder cancer, neither a significant difference of non-recurrent rate nor of survival rate was seen between the two groups. In the study of prostate cancer, neither a significant difference of non-recurrent rate nor of survival rate was seen between the two groups. These findings suggest UFT is less useful as an adjuvant therapy for the invasive bladder cancer and as an endocrine chemotherapy for newly diagnosed advanced prostate cancer.