Suppr超能文献

足叶乙苷和顺铂对比足叶乙苷和卡铂治疗低危生殖细胞肿瘤患者的随机试验:一项多机构研究

Randomized trial of etoposide and cisplatin versus etoposide and carboplatin in patients with good-risk germ cell tumors: a multiinstitutional study.

作者信息

Bajorin D F, Sarosdy M F, Pfister D G, Mazumdar M, Motzer R J, Scher H I, Geller N L, Fair W R, Herr H, Sogani P

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10021.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 1993 Apr;11(4):598-606. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1993.11.4.598.

Abstract

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 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.

摘要

目的

本多中心、随机III期临床试验评估了依托泊苷联合卡铂(EC)与依托泊苷联合顺铂(EP)治疗低危生殖细胞肿瘤(GCT)患者的疗效。

患者与方法

1986年10月至1990年12月期间,270例低危GCT患者被随机分配接受4个周期的EP或EC治疗。所有患者依托泊苷剂量均为第1至5天100mg/m²。EP组患者第1至5天接受顺铂20mg/m²治疗,治疗每21天重复一次。对于EC组患者,每个周期第1天卡铂剂量为500mg/m²,EC重复治疗间隔为28天。

结果

265例患者可评估:131例接受EC治疗,134例接受EP治疗。131例可评估的接受EC治疗的患者中有115例(88%)达到完全缓解(CR),而接受EP治疗的134例患者中有121例(90%)达到CR(P = 0.32)。16例(12%)接受EC治疗的患者从CR复发,而接受EP治疗的患者中有4例(3%)复发。因此,接受卡铂治疗的32例患者(24%)出现事件(部分缓解[IR]或复发),而接受顺铂治疗的134例患者中有17例(13%)出现事件(P = 0.02)。中位随访22.4个月时,接受EC治疗的患者无事件生存期和无复发生存期较差(分别为P = 0.02和P = 0.005)。总生存期无明显差异(P = 0.52)。

结论

采用此剂量和方案的EC两药联合治疗不如EP治疗。顺铂仍是治疗低危GCT患者的标准铂类药物。卡铂应仅限于GCT的试验研究。

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