INTRODUCTION: We evaluated an intensified therapeutic strategy in order to optimize treatment outcomes while maintaining acceptable toxicity in patients with advanced seminoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with advanced pure seminoma were retrospectively evaluated. Patients with low-risk advanced seminoma, according to the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group Consensus Classification criteria, had received four cycles of the BEP regimen either in the 5-day or the alternative 3-day schedule, while patients with intermediate-risk advanced seminoma had received four cycles of the IBEP regimen. RESULTS: Forty-two patients (80.7%) had testicular seminoma while ten patients (19.3%) presented with primary extragonadal (mediastinal or retroperitoneal) tumor. Forty-seven (90.8%) patients belonged to the low-risk group and five patients (9.2%) to the intermediate-risk group. Treatment-related toxicity was moderate, with febrile neutropenia being the most prevalent (13.5%). Twenty patients (38.5%) achieved a complete response to chemotherapy. Twenty-three from the remaining 32 patients had residual masses more than 3 cm and were submitted to surgery (2 patients), FDG-PET scan (8 patients) or surveillance (13 patients). After 69 months of follow-up there were three recurrences that were successfully treated with high-dose or salvage chemotherapy. No death by any cause was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Intensified cisplatin-based chemotherapy for patients with advanced seminoma does not confer evidence of superiority over radiotherapy alone or the standard BEP regimen. Patients with low-volume abdominal disease (clinical stage IIA and IIB) can be cured by four cycles of BEP instead of radiotherapy at the cost of a substantial increase in chemotherapy exposure and the resulting toxicity.
INTRODUCTION: We evaluated an intensified therapeutic strategy in order to optimize treatment outcomes while maintaining acceptable toxicity in patients with advanced seminoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with advanced pure seminoma were retrospectively evaluated. Patients with low-risk advanced seminoma, according to the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group Consensus Classification criteria, had received four cycles of the BEP regimen either in the 5-day or the alternative 3-day schedule, while patients with intermediate-risk advanced seminoma had received four cycles of the IBEP regimen. RESULTS: Forty-two patients (80.7%) had testicular seminoma while ten patients (19.3%) presented with primary extragonadal (mediastinal or retroperitoneal) tumor. Forty-seven (90.8%) patients belonged to the low-risk group and five patients (9.2%) to the intermediate-risk group. Treatment-related toxicity was moderate, with febrile neutropenia being the most prevalent (13.5%). Twenty patients (38.5%) achieved a complete response to chemotherapy. Twenty-three from the remaining 32 patients had residual masses more than 3 cm and were submitted to surgery (2 patients), FDG-PET scan (8 patients) or surveillance (13 patients). After 69 months of follow-up there were three recurrences that were successfully treated with high-dose or salvage chemotherapy. No death by any cause was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Intensified cisplatin-based chemotherapy for patients with advanced seminoma does not confer evidence of superiority over radiotherapy alone or the standard BEP regimen. Patients with low-volume abdominal disease (clinical stage IIA and IIB) can be cured by four cycles of BEP instead of radiotherapy at the cost of a substantial increase in chemotherapy exposure and the resulting toxicity.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: R de Wit; G Stoter; S B Kaye; D T Sleijfer; W G Jones; W W ten Bokkel Huinink; L A Rea; L Collette; R Sylvester Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Susanne Krege; Jörg Beyer; Rainer Souchon; Peter Albers; Walter Albrecht; Ferran Algaba; Michael Bamberg; István Bodrogi; Carsten Bokemeyer; Eva Cavallin-Ståhl; Johannes Classen; Christoph Clemm; Gabriella Cohn-Cedermark; Stéphane Culine; Gedske Daugaard; Pieter H M De Mulder; Maria De Santis; Maike de Wit; Ronald de Wit; Hans Günter Derigs; Klaus-Peter Dieckmann; Annette Dieing; Jean-Pierre Droz; Martin Fenner; Karim Fizazi; Aude Flechon; Sophie D Fosså; Xavier Garcia del Muro; Thomas Gauler; Lajos Geczi; Arthur Gerl; Jose Ramon Germa-Lluch; Silke Gillessen; Jörg T Hartmann; Michael Hartmann; Axel Heidenreich; Wolfgang Hoeltl; Alan Horwich; Robert Huddart; Michael Jewett; Johnathan Joffe; William G Jones; László Kisbenedek; Olbjørn Klepp; Sabine Kliesch; Kai Uwe Koehrmann; Christian Kollmannsberger; Markus Kuczyk; Pilar Laguna; Oscar Leiva Galvis; Volker Loy; Malcolm D Mason; Graham M Mead; Rolf Mueller; Craig Nichols; Nicola Nicolai; Tim Oliver; Dalibor Ondrus; Gosse O N Oosterhof; Luis Paz Ares; Giorgio Pizzocaro; Jörg Pont; Tobias Pottek; Tom Powles; Oliver Rick; Giovanni Rosti; Roberto Salvioni; Jutta Scheiderbauer; Hans-Ulrich Schmelz; Heinz Schmidberger; Hans-Joachim Schmoll; Mark Schrader; Felix Sedlmayer; Niels E Skakkebaek; Aslam Sohaib; Sergei Tjulandin; Padraig Warde; Stefan Weinknecht; Lothar Weissbach; Christian Wittekind; Eva Winter; Lori Wood; Hans von der Maase Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2007-12-26 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Sophie D Fosså; Ronald de Wit; J Trevor Roberts; Peter M Wilkinson; Pieter H M de Mulder; Graham M Mead; Pat Cook; Linda de Prijck; Sally Stenning; Neil K Aaronson; Andrew Bottomley; Laurence Collette Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544