Alexey Tryakin1, Mikhail Fedyanin2, Anatoly Bulanov2, Shalva Kashia3, Ildar Kurmukov3, Vsevolod Matveev4, Igor Fainstein5, Olga Gordeeva6, Tatjana Zakharova7, Sergei Tjulandin2. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Chemotherapy, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, 24 Kashirskoye sh., Moscow, 115478, Russia. atryakin@mail.ru. 2. Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Chemotherapy, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, 24 Kashirskoye sh., Moscow, 115478, Russia. 3. Intensive Care Unit, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia. 4. Urology Department, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia. 5. Radiosurgery Department, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia. 6. Department of Chemotherapy and Combined Treatment of Malignant Tumors, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia. 7. Pathology Department, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patients with metastatic nonseminomatous germ cell tumors (mNSGCT) and a high tumor burden or a poor performance status at initial diagnosis are at risk from potentially life-threatening early complications during or after the first chemotherapy cycle. The outcomes with dose-reduced first cycle of chemotherapy in this population of patients are not well established. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with mNSGCT and International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) poor risk features. All patients received cisplatin and etoposide-based combinations as first-line treatment. Ultra high tumor marker levels were defined as α-fetoprotein ≥ 100,000 ng/ml or human chorionic gonadotropin ≥ 200,000 mIU/ml. Before 2005, the first treatment cycle was administered at a full dose in our center. After 2005, we used an abbreviated course of cisplatin and etoposide (EP) for the first cycle, followed by subsequent full-dose administration. RESULTS: From 1987 to 2012, 265 patients with poor risk features according to IGCCCG received first-line chemotherapy. Among them, 63 out of 265 (24%) patients had ultra high tumor marker levels and/or ECOG performance status of 3-4. Dose reduction of the first chemotherapy cycle was associated with a significant decrease of life-threatening complications from 76 to 44% (p = 0.01), but not with the overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.44-2.26). CONCLUSIONS: Dose reduction of the first EP cycle by 40-60% in the subgroup of poor risk patients with ultra high tumor marker levels and/or ECOG performance status 3-4 is associated with significantly lowered acute complication rates but not with overall survival.
PURPOSE:Patients with metastatic nonseminomatous germ cell tumors (mNSGCT) and a high tumor burden or a poor performance status at initial diagnosis are at risk from potentially life-threatening early complications during or after the first chemotherapy cycle. The outcomes with dose-reduced first cycle of chemotherapy in this population of patients are not well established. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with mNSGCT and International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) poor risk features. All patients received cisplatin and etoposide-based combinations as first-line treatment. Ultra high tumor marker levels were defined as α-fetoprotein ≥ 100,000 ng/ml or human chorionic gonadotropin ≥ 200,000 mIU/ml. Before 2005, the first treatment cycle was administered at a full dose in our center. After 2005, we used an abbreviated course of cisplatin and etoposide (EP) for the first cycle, followed by subsequent full-dose administration. RESULTS: From 1987 to 2012, 265 patients with poor risk features according to IGCCCG received first-line chemotherapy. Among them, 63 out of 265 (24%) patients had ultra high tumor marker levels and/or ECOG performance status of 3-4. Dose reduction of the first chemotherapy cycle was associated with a significant decrease of life-threatening complications from 76 to 44% (p = 0.01), but not with the overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.44-2.26). CONCLUSIONS: Dose reduction of the first EP cycle by 40-60% in the subgroup of poor risk patients with ultra high tumor marker levels and/or ECOG performance status 3-4 is associated with significantly lowered acute complication rates but not with overall survival.
Authors: A Tryakin; M Fedyanin; D Kanagavel; I Fainstein; J Sergeev; B Polockij; V Matveev; T Zakharova; A Garin; S Tjulandin Journal: Urology Date: 2011-07-20 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: A Moran-Ribon; J P Droz; J Kattan; B Leclercq; M Ghosn; D Couanet; M Ostronoff; S Culine; B Misset; B Escudier Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 1994-07 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: C Massard; A Plantade; M Gross-Goupil; Y Loriot; B Besse; B Raynard; F Blot; S Antoun; G Nitenberg; B Escudier; K Fizazi Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2010-02-24 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Robert A Huddart; Rhian Gabe; Fay H Cafferty; Philip Pollock; Jeff D White; Jonathan Shamash; Michael H Cullen; Sally P Stenning Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-07-04 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Michal Mego; Katarina Rejlekova; Daniela Svetlovska; Vera Miskovska; Ad J M Gillis; Valentina De Angelis; Katarina Kalavska; Jana Obertova; Patrik Palacka; Maria Reckova; Zuzana Sycova-Mila; Daniel Pindak; Michal Chovanec; Leendert H J Looijenga; Jozef Mardiak Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2021-09-22
Authors: Katarina Rejlekova; Katarina Kalavska; Marek Makovnik; Nikola Hapakova; Michal Chovanec; Valentina De Angelis; Jana Obertova; Patrik Palacka; Zuzana Sycova-Mila; Jozef Mardiak; Michal Mego Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 5.738