Suppr超能文献

顺铂、依托泊苷联合博来霉素或异环磷酰胺治疗播散性生殖细胞肿瘤:一项多组间试验的最终分析

Cisplatin, etoposide and either bleomycin or ifosfamide in the treatment of disseminated germ cell tumors: final analysis of an intergroup trial.

作者信息

Hinton Stuart, Catalano Paul J, Einhorn Lawrence H, Nichols Craig R, David Crawford E, Vogelzang Nicholas, Trump Donald, Loehrer Patrick J

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Indiana University Medical Center and The Walther Cancer Institute, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.

出版信息

Cancer. 2003 Apr 15;97(8):1869-75. doi: 10.1002/cncr.11271.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Various staging systems have been proposed for disseminated germ cell neoplasms. The Indiana University staging system was based on clinical and radiographic findings only, whereas the newly created International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) staging system also utilized serum markers as a prognostic factor. This study updated the intergroup trial that compared the standard therapy of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) with etoposide, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (VIP) in advanced germ cell tumors and reanalyzed the results using the IGCCCG staging system.

METHODS

From October 1987 to April 1992, 304 patients with advanced-stage germ cell tumors (using the Indiana University staging system) were randomized to receive four cycles of BEP or VIP. Two hundred and eighty-six patients were eligible and fully evaluable. With a median follow-up of 7.3 years, 283 of the 286 evaluable patients from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group protocol, E3887, were reclassified using the IGCCCG staging system. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity were assessed for the treatment arms.

RESULTS

With a longer follow-up of 7.3 years and using the Indiana University staging system, the PFS rates were 64% versus 58% and the OS rates were 69% versus 67% in the VIP and BEP arms, respectively. For patients reclassified with the IGCCCG staging system, the PFS rates were 81%, 72%, and 54% and the OS rates were 89%, 81%, and 60% for good, intermediate, and poor-risk patients, respectively. Differences in OS (VIP, 62%; BEP, 57%) and PFS (VIP, 56%; BEP, 49%) for the subset of patients reclassified as poor risk by the IGCCCG staging system were not significantly different. More toxicity, primarily hematologic toxicity, occurred on the VIP arm.

CONCLUSIONS

With a median follow-up of 7.3 years and with a reclassification based on the IGCCCG, OS and PFS rates were comparable between BEP and VIP. Toxicity, primarily hematologic, was modestly greater with the ifosfamide-containing arm. The VIP regimen may be considered a treatment alternative for patients with underlying pulmonary disease. In most patients with poor and intermediate-risk germ cell tumors, four cycles of BEP remain the standard therapy.

摘要

背景

已针对播散性生殖细胞肿瘤提出了多种分期系统。印第安纳大学分期系统仅基于临床和影像学检查结果,而新创建的国际生殖细胞癌协作组(IGCCCG)分期系统还将血清标志物用作预后因素。本研究更新了一项比较博来霉素、依托泊苷和顺铂(BEP)与依托泊苷、异环磷酰胺和顺铂(VIP)在晚期生殖细胞肿瘤中的标准治疗的组间试验,并使用IGCCCG分期系统重新分析了结果。

方法

从1987年10月至1992年4月,304例晚期生殖细胞肿瘤患者(采用印第安纳大学分期系统)被随机分配接受四个周期的BEP或VIP治疗。286例患者符合条件且可进行全面评估。中位随访7.3年,东部肿瘤协作组方案E3887中的286例可评估患者中的283例使用IGCCCG分期系统进行了重新分类。评估了各治疗组的无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)和毒性。

结果

随访7.3年且采用印第安纳大学分期系统时,VIP组和BEP组的PFS率分别为64%和58%,OS率分别为69%和67%。对于使用IGCCCG分期系统重新分类的患者,低、中、高风险患者的PFS率分别为81%、72%和54%,OS率分别为89%、81%和60%。IGCCCG分期系统重新分类为高风险的患者亚组的OS(VIP组为62%;BEP组为57%)和PFS(VIP组为56%;BEP组为49%)差异无统计学意义。VIP组出现更多毒性,主要是血液学毒性。

结论

中位随访7.3年且基于IGCCCG进行重新分类时,BEP和VIP的OS和PFS率相当。含异环磷酰胺组的毒性,主要是血液学毒性,略高。VIP方案可被视为患有潜在肺部疾病患者的一种治疗选择。在大多数低风险和中风险生殖细胞肿瘤患者中,四个周期的BEP仍然是标准治疗。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验