PURPOSE: This multicenter, randomized phase III clinical trial evaluated the efficacy of etoposide plus carboplatin (EC) versus etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) in good-risk germ cell tumor (GCT) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between October 1986 and December 1990, 270 patients with good-risk GCTs were randomized to receive four cycles of either EP or EC. The etoposide dose in all patients was 100 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5. EP patients received cisplatin at 20 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5 and therapy was recycled at 21-day intervals. For EC patients, the carboplatin dose was 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle and the EC recycling interval was 28 days. RESULTS:Two hundred sixty-five patients were assessable: 131 patients treated withEC and 134 treated with EP. One hundred fifteen of 131 assessable patients (88%) treated with EC achieved a complete response (CR) versus 121 of 134 patients (90%) treated with EP (P = .32). Sixteen patients (12%) treated with EC relapsed from CR versus four patients (3%) treated with EP. Therefore, 32 patients (24%) who received carboplatin experienced an event (incomplete response [IR] or relapse) compared with 17 of 134 patients (13%) who received cisplatin (P = .02). At a median follow-up of 22.4 months, event-free and relapse-free survival were inferior for patients treated with EC (P = .02 and P = .005, respectively). No difference in overall survival was evident (P = .52). CONCLUSION: Two-drug therapy with EC using this dose and schedule was inferior to therapy with EP. Cisplatin remains as the standard platinum analog in the treatment of patients with good-risk GCTs. Carboplatin should be restricted to investigational trials in GCT.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: This multicenter, randomized phase III clinical trial evaluated the efficacy of etoposide plus carboplatin (EC) versus etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) in good-risk germ cell tumor (GCT) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between October 1986 and December 1990, 270 patients with good-risk GCTs were randomized to receive four cycles of either EP or EC. The etoposide dose in all patients was 100 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5. EPpatients received cisplatin at 20 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5 and therapy was recycled at 21-day intervals. For ECpatients, the carboplatin dose was 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle and the EC recycling interval was 28 days. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-five patients were assessable: 131 patients treated with EC and 134 treated with EP. One hundred fifteen of 131 assessable patients (88%) treated with EC achieved a complete response (CR) versus 121 of 134 patients (90%) treated with EP (P = .32). Sixteen patients (12%) treated with EC relapsed from CR versus four patients (3%) treated with EP. Therefore, 32 patients (24%) who received carboplatin experienced an event (incomplete response [IR] or relapse) compared with 17 of 134 patients (13%) who received cisplatin (P = .02). At a median follow-up of 22.4 months, event-free and relapse-free survival were inferior for patients treated with EC (P = .02 and P = .005, respectively). No difference in overall survival was evident (P = .52). CONCLUSION: Two-drug therapy with EC using this dose and schedule was inferior to therapy with EP. Cisplatin remains as the standard platinum analog in the treatment of patients with good-risk GCTs. Carboplatin should be restricted to investigational trials in GCT.
Authors: Hans-Georg Kopp; Markus Kuczyk; Johannes Classen; Arnulf Stenzl; Lothar Kanz; Frank Mayer; Michael Bamberg; Jörg Thomas Hartmann Journal: Drugs Date: 2006 Impact factor: 9.546
Authors: Lori Wood; Christian Kollmannsberger; Michael Jewett; Peter Chung; Sebastian Hotte; Martin O'Malley; Joan Sweet; Lynn Anson-Cartwright; Eric Winquist; Scott North; Scott Tyldesley; Jeremy Sturgeon; Mary Gospodarowicz; Roanne Segal; Tina Cheng; Peter Venner; Malcolm Moore; Peter Albers; Robert Huddart; Craig Nichols; Padraig Warde Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Shilajit D Kundu; Darren R Feldman; Brett S Carver; Amit Gupta; George J Bosl; Robert J Motzer; Dean F Bajorin; Joel Sheinfeld Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: James E Korkola; Jane Houldsworth; Darren R Feldman; Adam B Olshen; Li-Xuan Qin; Sujata Patil; Victor E Reuter; George J Bosl; R S K Chaganti Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-09-21 Impact factor: 44.544