Erasmus University Medical Center/Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Mar 10;30(8):792-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.37.0171. Epub 2012 Jan 23.
To compare the efficacy of four cycles of paclitaxel-bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (T-BEP) to four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) in previously untreated patients with intermediate-prognosis germ-cell cancer (GCC).
Patients were randomly assigned to receive either T-BEP or standard BEP. Patients assigned to the T-BEP group received paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) in a 3-hour infusion. Patients who were administered T-BEP received primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. The study was designed as a randomized open-label phase II/III study. To show a 10% improvement in 3-year progression-free survival (PFS), the study aimed to recruit 498 patients but closed with 337 patients as a result of slow accrual.
Accrual was from November 1998 to April 2009. A total of 169 patients were administered BEP, and 168 patients were administered T-BEP. Thirteen patients in both arms were ineligible, mainly as a result of a good prognosis of GCC (eight patients administered BEP; six patients administered T-BEP) or a poor prognosis of GCC (one patient administered BEP; four patients administered T-BEP). PFS at 3 years (intent to treat) was 79.4% in the T-BEP group versus 71.1% in the BEP group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; CI, 0.47 to 1.13; P [log-rank test] = 0.153). PFS at 3 years in all eligible patients was 82.7% versus 70.1%, respectively (HR, 0.60; CI: 0.37 to 0.97) and was statistically significant (P = 0.03). Overall survival was not statistically different.
T-BEP administered with G-CSF seems to be a safe and effective treatment regimen for patients with intermediate-prognosis GCC. However, the study recruited a smaller-than-planned number of patients and included 7.7% ineligible patients. The primary analysis of the trial could not demonstrate statistical superiority of T-BEP for PFS. When ineligible patients were excluded, the analysis of all eligible patients demonstrated a 12% superior 3-year PFS with T-BEP, which was statistically significant.
比较新诊断为中危预后生殖细胞肿瘤(GCC)患者接受 4 周期紫杉醇博来霉素依托泊苷顺铂(T-BEP)与 4 周期博来霉素依托泊苷顺铂(BEP)治疗的疗效。
患者随机分配接受 T-BEP 或标准 BEP 治疗。T-BEP 组患者接受 175mg/m2 紫杉醇 3 小时输注。接受 T-BEP 治疗的患者接受了原发性粒细胞集落刺激因子(G-CSF)预防。该研究设计为随机开放标签 II/III 期研究。为了显示 3 年无进展生存期(PFS)提高 10%,该研究旨在招募 498 例患者,但由于入组缓慢,最终仅招募了 337 例患者。
入组时间为 1998 年 11 月至 2009 年 4 月。169 例患者接受了 BEP 治疗,168 例患者接受了 T-BEP 治疗。由于 GCC 预后良好(8 例接受 BEP 治疗;6 例接受 T-BEP 治疗)或 GCC 预后不良(1 例接受 BEP 治疗;4 例接受 T-BEP 治疗),两组各有 13 例患者不符合入组条件。3 年(意向治疗)时的 PFS 在 T-BEP 组为 79.4%,在 BEP 组为 71.1%(风险比 [HR],0.73;95%CI,0.47 至 1.13;P[对数秩检验] = 0.153)。所有合格患者的 3 年 PFS 分别为 82.7%和 70.1%(HR,0.60;95%CI:0.37 至 0.97),差异有统计学意义(P = 0.03)。总生存无统计学差异。
G-CSF 联合 T-BEP 似乎是治疗中危预后 GCC 患者的一种安全有效的治疗方案。然而,该研究入组患者数量少于计划数量,且纳入了 7.7%的不合格患者。试验的主要分析未能证明 T-BEP 在 PFS 方面具有统计学优势。当排除不合格患者后,对所有合格患者的分析显示 T-BEP 可使 3 年 PFS 提高 12%,差异有统计学意义。