Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Keimzelltumoren

Therapie von Hodentumoren

  • Zertifizierte Fortbildung
  • Published:
InFo Hämatologie + Onkologie Aims and scope

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

1
2
3
4
5

Literatur

  1. Robert Koch-Institut. Zentrum für Krebsregisterdaten. 2019. https://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/DE/Content/Publikationen/Krebs_in_Deutschland/kid_2019/kid_2019_c62_hoden.pdf abgerufen am 17. Juli 2020

  2. Pettersson A et al. Age at surgery for undescended testis and risk of testicular cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(18):1835-41

  3. Hemminki K, Li X. Familial risk in testicular cancer as a clue to a heritable and environmental aetiology. Br J Cancer. 2004;90(9):1765-70

  4. von der Maase H et al. Carcinoma in situ of contralateral testis in patients with testicular germ cell cancer: study of 27 cases in 500 patients. Br Med J. 1986;293(6559):1398-1401

  5. Adra N, Einhorn L. Testicular cancer update. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2017;16(5):386-96

  6. Dieckmann KP et al. Serum Levels of MicroRNA-371a-3p (M371 Test) as a New Biomarker of Testicular Germ Cell Tumors: Results of a Prospective Multicentric Study. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(16):1412-23

  7. The International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group. International Germ Cell Consensus Classification: a prognostic factor-based staging system for metastatic germ cell cancers. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:594-603

  8. Mortensen MS et al. A nationwide cohort study of stage I seminoma patients followed on a surveillance program. Eur Urol. 2014;66:1172-8

  9. Tandstad T et al. Treatment of stage I seminoma, with one course of adjuvant carboplatin or surveillance, risk-adapted recommendations implementing patient autonomy: a report from the Swedish and Norwegian Testicular Cancer Group (SWENOTECA). Ann Oncol. 2016;27(7):1299-304

  10. Mortensen MS et al. Surveillance versus adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with high risk stage I seminoma. Cancer. 2017;123:1212-8

  11. Honecker F et al. ESMO Consensus Conference on testicular germ cell cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:1658-86

  12. Oldenburg J et al. Personalizing, not patronizing: the case for patient autonomy by unbiased presentation of management options in stage I testicular cancer. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:833-8

  13. Beyer J et al. Maintaining Success, Reducing Treatment Burden, Focussing on Survivorship: Highlights from the Third European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ Cell Cancer. Ann Oncol. 2013;24:878-88

  14. Kollmannsberger C et al. Patterns of relapse in patients with clinical stage I testicular cancer managed with active surveillance. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:51-7

  15. Daugaard G et al. Surveillance for stage I nonseminoma testicular cancer: outcomes and long-term follow-up in a population-based cohort. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(34):3817-23

  16. Albers P et al. Randomized phase III trial comparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection with one course of bleomycin and etoposide plus cisplatin chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of clinical stage I Nonseminomatous testicular germ cell tumors: AUO trial AH 01/94 by the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(18):2966-72

  17. Tandstad T et al. One course of adjuvant BEP in clinical stage I nonseminoma mature and expanded results from the SWENOTECA group. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:2167-72

  18. Huddert RA et al. A single-arm trial evaluating one cycle of BEP as adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk, stage 1 non-seminomatous or combined germ cell tumors of the testis (NSGCTT). J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(Suppl_15):1111

  19. Yu HY et al. Quality of surveillance for stage I testis cancer in the community. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4327-32

  20. Ernst DS et al. Compliance and outcome of patients with stage 1 non-seminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCT) managed with surveillance programs in seven Canadian centres. Can J Urol. 2005;12:2575-80

  21. Weissbach L et al. RPLND or primary chemotherapy in clinical stage IIA/B nonseminomatous germ cell tumors? Results of a prospective multicenter trial including quality of life assessment. Eur Urol. 2000;37(5):582-94

  22. Saxman SB et al. Long-term follow-up of a phase III study of three versus four cyles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin in favorable-prognosis germ-cell tumors: The Indiana University experience. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:702-6

  23. Toner GC et al. for the Australian and New Zealand Germ Cell Trial Group: Comparison of two standard chemotherapy regimens for good-prognosis germ-cell tumours: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2001;357:739-45

  24. Fankhauser CD et al. Improved survival in metastatic germ-cell cancer. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:347-51

  25. Hentrich M et al. Improved outcomes in metastatic germ cell cancer: results from a large cohort study. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03343-2

  26. de Wit R et al. Equivalence of three or four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin chemotherapy and of a 3- or 5-day schedule in good-prognosis germ cell cancer: a randomized study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Genitourinary Tract Cancer Cooperative Group and the Medical Research Council J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(6):1629-40

  27. Culine S et al. Refining the optimal chemotherapy regimen for good-risk metastatic nonseminomatous germ-cell tumors: a randomized trial of the Genito-Urinary Group of the French Federation of Cancer Centers (GETUG T93BP). Ann Oncol. 2007;18(5):917-24

  28. De Wit R et al. Randomized phase III study comparing paclitaxel-bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin to standard BEP in intermediate prognosis germ cell-cancer. Intergroup Study EORTC 30983. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:792-9

  29. Seidel C et al. The prognostic impact of different tumor marker levels in nonseminomatous germ cell tumor patients with intermediate prognosis: A registry of the International Global Germ Cell Tumor Collaborative Group (G3). Urol Oncol. 2019;37(11):809.e19-809.e25

  30. Motzer RJ et al. Phase III randomized trial of conventional-dose chemotherapy with or without high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem-cell rescue as first-line treatment for patients with poor-prognosis metastatic germ cell tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:247-56

  31. Necchi A et al. High-dose sequential chemotherapy (HDS) versus PEB chemotherapy as first-line treatment of patients with poor prognosis germ-cell tumors: mature results of an Italian randomized phase II study. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(1):167-72

  32. Daugaard G et al. A randomized phase III study comparing standard dose BEP with sequential high-dose cisplatin, etoposide, and ifosfamide (VIP) plus stem-cell support in males with poor-prognosis germ-cell cancer. An intergroup study of EORTC, GTCSG, and Grupo Germinal (EORTC 30974) Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1054-61

  33. Droz JP et al. Genito-Urinary Group of the French Federation of Cancer Centers (GETUG). Failure of high-dose cyclophosphamide and etoposide combined with double-dose cisplatin and bone marrow support in patients with high-volume metastatic nonseminomatous germ-cell tumours: mature results of a randomised trial. Eur Urol. 2007;51(3):739-46

  34. Feldman D et al. Multicenter randomized phase 2 trial of paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (TIP) versus bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) for first-line treatment of patients (pts) with intermediate- or poor-risk germ cell tumors (GCT). J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(15_Suppl):4508

  35. Fizazzi K et al. Personalised chemotherapy based on tumour marker decline in poor prognosis germ-cell tumours (GETUG 13): a phase 3, multicentre, randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1442-50

  36. Gillessen S et al. Redefining the IGCCCG classification in advanced non-seminoma. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(Suppl. 5):v357-358

  37. Beyer J et al. Prognostic factors in advanced seminoma: an analysis from the IGCCCG Update Consortium. J Clin Oncol. 38(6_Suppl):386

  38. Ravi P et al. A meta-analysis of patient outcomes with subcentimeter disease after chemotherapy for metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell tumor. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:331-8

  39. Fizazi K et al. Assessing prognosis and optimizing treatment in patients with postchemotherapy viable nonseminomatous germ-cell tumors (NSGCT): results of the sCR2 international study. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:29-64

  40. Cathomas R et al. Questioning the value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for residual lesions after chemotherapy for metastatic seminoma: results of an International Global Germ Cell Cancer Group Registry. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:3381-7

  41. Pico JL et al. A randomised trial of high-dose chemotherapy in the salvage treatment of patients failing first-line platinum chemotherapy for advanced germ cell tumours. Ann Oncol. 2005;16:1152-9

  42. Adra N et al. Highdose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral-blood stem-cell transplantation for relapsed metastatic germ cell tumors: the Indiana University experience. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(10):1096-102

  43. The International Prognostic Factors Study Group. Prognostic factors in patients with metastatic germ cell tumors who experienced treatment failure with cisplatin-based first-line chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4906-11

  44. Lorch A et al. Conventional-dose versus high-dose chemotherapy as first salvage treatment in male patients with metastatic germ cell tumors: evidence from a large international database. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2178-84

  45. Lorch A et al. Sequential versus single high-dose chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory germ cell tumors: Long-term results of a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:800-5

  46. Seidel C et al. Efficacy and safety of gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, and paclitaxel in cisplatin-refractory germ cell cancer in routine care--Registry data from an outcomes research project of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. Urol Oncol. 2016;34(4):167.e21-8

  47. Haugnes HS et al. Cardiovascular risk factors and morbidity in long-term survivors of testicular cancer: a 20-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(30):4649-57

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. III. Medizinische Abteilung – Hämatologie und Onkologie, Rotkreuzklinikum München, Nymphenburger Str. 163, 80634, München, Germany

    Marcus Hentrich

Authors
  1. Marcus Hentrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcus Hentrich.

Ethics declarations

Der Autor erklärt, dass er sich bei der Erstellung des Beitrags von keinen wirtschaftlichen Interessen leiten ließ. Der Autor legt folgende potenzielle Interessenkonflikte offen: keine.

Der Verlag erklärt, dass die inhaltliche Qualität des Beitrags von zwei unabhängigen Gutachtern geprüft wurde. Werbung in dieser Zeitschriftenausgabe hat keinen Bezug zur CME-Fortbildung.

Der Verlag garantiert, dass die CME-Fortbildung sowie die CME-Fragen frei sind von werblichen Aussagen und keinerlei Produktempfehlungen enthalten. Dies gilt insbesondere für Präparate, die zur Therapie des dargestellten Krankheitsbildes geeignet sind.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hentrich, M. Therapie von Hodentumoren. InFo Hämatol Onkol 23, 48–58 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15004-020-8271-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15004-020-8271-5

Search

Navigation