Advertisement

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology

, Volume 144, Issue 9, pp 1817–1823 | Cite as

Dose-reduced first cycle of chemotherapy for prevention of life-threatening acute complications in nonseminomatous germ cell tumor patients with ultra high tumor markers and/or poor performance status

  • Alexey Tryakin
  • Mikhail Fedyanin
  • Anatoly Bulanov
  • Shalva Kashia
  • Ildar Kurmukov
  • Vsevolod Matveev
  • Igor Fainstein
  • Olga Gordeeva
  • Tatjana Zakharova
  • Sergei Tjulandin
Original Article – Clinical Oncology

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.

Keywords

Nonseminomatous germ cell tumor Testicular cancers Choriocarcinoma, non-gestational Induction chemotherapy Ultra-high tumor markers Poor risk Extensive tumor burden 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

References

  1. Gillessen S, Powles T, Lim L et al (2010) Low dose induction chemotherapy with baby-BOP in patients with metastatic germ cell tumours does not compromise outcome: a single centre experience. Ann Oncol 21:1589–1593CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Huddart RA, Gabe R, Cafferty FH et al (2015) A randomised phase 2 trial of intensive induction chemotherapy (CBOP/BEP) and standard BEP in poor-prognosis germ cell tumours (MRC TE23, CRUK 05/014, ISRCTN 53643604). Eur Urol 67:534–543CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (1997) International Germ Cell Consensus Classification: a prognostic factor-based staging system for metastatic germ cell cancers. J Clin Oncol 15:594–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Logothetis CJ (1984) Choriocarcinoma syndrome. Cancer Bull 36:118–120Google Scholar
  5. Massard C, Plantade A, Gross-Goupil M et al (2010) Poor prognosis nonseminomatous germ-cell tumours (NSGCTs): should chemotherapy doses be reduced at first cycle to prevent acute respiratory distress syndrome in patients with multiple lung metastases? Ann Oncol 21(8):1585–1588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Moran-Ribon A, Droz JP, Leclercq B et al (1994) Super-high risk germ-cell tumors:a clinical entity. Report of eleven cases. Support Care Cancer 2:253–258CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Motzer RJ, Bosl GJ (1987) Hemorrhage: a complication of metastatic testicular choriocarcinoma. Urology 30(2):119–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Tryakin A, Tjulandin S, Titov D et al (2004) C-BOP-3BEP as induction chemotherapy (CT) in nonseminomatous germ cell tumor (NSGCT) patients with poor prognosis. J Clin Oncol ASCO Ann Meeting Proc 22(14S):486 (abstr.) Google Scholar
  9. Tryakin A, Fedyanin M, Kanagavel D et al (2011) Paclitaxel + BEP (T-BEP) regimen as induction chemotherapy in poor prognosis patients with nonseminomatous germ cell tumors: a phase II study. Urology 78(3):620–625CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Tryakin A, Fedyanin M, Sergeev U et al (2015) Two-weekly accelerated BEP (aBEP) regimen as induction chemotherapy in intermediate and poor prognosis patients (pts) with nonseminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCT): Efficacy results of phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 33:e15566 (suppl; abstr) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexey Tryakin
    • 1
  • Mikhail Fedyanin
    • 1
  • Anatoly Bulanov
    • 1
  • Shalva Kashia
    • 2
  • Ildar Kurmukov
    • 2
  • Vsevolod Matveev
    • 3
  • Igor Fainstein
    • 4
  • Olga Gordeeva
    • 5
  • Tatjana Zakharova
    • 6
  • Sergei Tjulandin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Clinical Pharmacology and ChemotherapyN.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research CenterMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Intensive Care UnitN.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research CenterMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Urology DepartmentN.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research CenterMoscowRussia
  4. 4.Radiosurgery DepartmentN.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research CenterMoscowRussia
  5. 5.Department of Chemotherapy and Combined Treatment of Malignant TumorsN.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research CenterMoscowRussia
  6. 6.Pathology DepartmentN.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research CenterMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations