Sequential high-dose chemotherapy protocol for relapsed poor prognosis germ cell tumors combining two mobilization and cytoreductive treatments followed by three high-dose chemotherapy regimens supported by autologous stem cell transplantation. Results of the phase II multicentric TAXIF trial

J.-P. Lotz1,*, B. Bui2, F. Gomez3, C. Théodore4, A. Caty5, K. Fizazi4, G. Gravis6, R. Delva7, J. Peny8, P. Viens6, B. Duclos9, T. De Revel10, H. Curé11, J. Gligorov1, S. Guillemaut3, C. Ségura3, S. Provent1, J.-P. Drozl2, S. Culine13 and P. Bironl2 On behalf of the Groupe d'Etudes des Tumeurs Uro-Génitales (GETUG)

Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer, 101 rue de Tolbiac, 75 013 Paris, France
Departments of Medical Oncology, 1Hôpital Tenon, Paris, 2 Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, 4 Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, 5 Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, 6 Institut Paoli-Calmette, Marseille, 7 Centre Paul Papin, Angers, 8 Centre François Baclesse, Caen, 9 Centre Paul Strauss, Strasbourg, 10 Hôpital d'Instruction des Armées, Clamart, 11 Centre Jean Perrin, Clermont-Ferrand, 12 Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, 13 Centre Val d'Aurelle, Montpellier; 3 Biostatistical Unit, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France

* Correspondence to: Professor J.-P. Lotz, Hôpital Tenon, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris, 4 rue de Chine, 75 970 Paris cedex 20, France. Tel: +33-1-56-01-60-58; Fax: +33-1-56-01-68-75; Email: jean-pierre.lotz{at}tnn.ap-hop-paris.fr


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Background: High-dose chemotherapy (HD-CT) is able to circumvent platinum resistance of resistant/refractory germ-cell tumors (GCTs), but expectancy of cure remains low. New strategies are needed with new drugs and a sequential approach.

Materials and methods: Patients with relapsed poor-prognosis GCTs were scheduled to receive two cycles combining epirubicin and paclitaxel (Taxol) followed by three consecutive HD-CT supported by stem cell transplantation [one course combining cyclophosphamide, 3 g/m2 + thiotepa, 400 mg/m2, followed by two ICE regimens (ifosfamide, 10 g/m2, carboplatin, AUC 20, etoposide, 1500 mg/m2)].

Results: From March 1998 to September 2001 (median follow-up, 31.8 months), 45 patients (median age, 28 years) were enrolled in this phase II study. Twenty-two patients received the complete course. Twenty-five patients died from progression and five from toxicity. The overall response rate was 37.7%, including an 8.9% complete response rate. The median overall survival was 11.8 months. The 3-year survival and progression-free survival rate was 23.5%. The ‘Beyer’ prognostic score predicted the outcome after HD-CT.

Conclusion: Although our results warrant further studies on HD-CT in relapsed poor prognosis GCTs, patients with a Beyer score >2 did not benefit from this approach and should not be enrolled in HD-CT trials. Better selection criteria have to be fulfilled in forthcoming studies.

Key words: germ-cell tumors, high-dose chemotherapy


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Over the two last decades, the striking improvement in prognosis of testicular germ-cell tumors (GCTs) was mainly attributable to the development of more effective chemotherapies [1Go–4Go]. For patients who do not achieve lasting complete response (CR) to chemotherapy (CT), the introduction of ifosfamide (IFM) combined with vinblastine (VLB) plus cisplatin in the VeIP regimen may offer a 25–40% CR rate [5Go, 6Go]. The outcome of patients with primary extra-gonadal GCTs (EGCTs) varies [4Go]. A review of 635 cases of EGCTs allowed Hartmann et al. to produce some prognostic risk groupings: ‘excellent prognosis’, all seminomatous EGCTs (89% 5-year survival rate), ‘intermediate low’, ‘intermediate high’ and ‘poor’, all non-seminomatous EGCTs with a 69%, 55% and 17% 5-year survival rate, respectively [7Go]. For patients who relapse or exhibit inadequate response after a conventional-dose salvage regimen, high-dose chemotherapy (HD-CT) using a carboplatin-based regimen supported by peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) overcomes the resistance to conventional CT [8Go–15Go]. HD-CT may also increase response rate and survival when given as first-salvage treatment in cisplatin-sensitive patients [16Go–18Go]. However, despite the use of HD-CT, long-term remissions after salvage treatment can only be expected in 10–40% of patients, depending on risk factors, notably the location of the primary tumor and at first, the degree of sensitivity to cisplatin [19Go, 20Go]. To improve the results of HD-CT, old and new drugs are to be revisited. Epirubicin provides a biological response rate of 50% in refractory diseases [21Go, 22Go]. Paclitaxel has been shown to be effective in around 20% of patients with resistant disease, both as a single agent or in combination [23Go–25Go]. Moreover, the combination of epirubicin and paclitaxel supported by granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) is capable of stem cell mobilization and their use as first-line therapy before HD-CT seems logical [26Go, 27Go]. Among the older drugs, thiotepa and cyclophosphamide (CPM), both suitable for HD-CT and efficient in GCTs, have been studied by Rodenhuis et al. [28Go]. In view of these data, we decided to develop a high-dose protocol combining two courses of epirubicin and paclitaxel as front-line therapy, followed by three HD-CT cycles (thiotepa and CPM for the first, etoposide, ifosfamide and carboplatin for the second and the third courses), in the treatment of relapsed poor prognosis GCTs. We present the final results herein of this so-called ‘TAXIF’ regimen [29Go].


    Materials and methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Patient selection and characteristics
The treatment was designed for relapsed poor prognosis patients with testicular or extra-gonadal GCTs previously treated with cisplatin-containing regimens. Poor prognosis patients were defined as either refractory with increasing tumor markers less than 1 month after cisplatin administration, whether in the course of first-line CT or in that of salvage treatment, or patients who showed evidence of progression after at least two lines of cisplatin-containing CT (i.e. BEP and VeIP). Eligibility requirements included the following criteria: age >15 and <65 years, using ECOG performance status <3, histologically or biologically documented GCTs, testicular, abdominal or mediastinal tumors, measurable or evaluable disease, life expectancy >3 months, normal cardiac, liver, and renal function tests, absence of infection, HIV negative test, and signed informed consent. All patients had to have been previously treated with at least one line of a cisplatin-containing regimen and were included if they were refractory after one or two line(s) of cisplatin-based CT, or had relapsed after two lines of a cisplatin-based CT. Non-inclusion criteria were: growing teratoma syndrome, possibility of being treated with a conventional cisplatin-based CT, and previous HD-CT regimen. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Medicine in Lyon, France.

Initial evaluation
Each patient underwent clinical evaluation that included measurements of tumor marker levels, and an imaging work-up. The tumor marker levels were determined throughout the sequence of treatment (normal level <10 ng/ml for alpha-fetoprotein and <2 mIU/ml for HCG). The tumor mass was measured after the first two cycles of induction/mobilization therapy and at the end of the treatment.

Chemotherapy
Patients were scheduled to receive two courses of front-line mobilization CT followed by 3 HD-CT supported by PBSCT. The front-line treatment consisted of a combination of epirubicin (100 mg/m2 in a 30-min infusion), and paclitaxel (Taxol®, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA; 250 mg/m2 given in a 3-h infusion), administered on days 1 and 14. These two cycles were supported by filgrastim (Neupogen®), 5 µg/kg, twice a day from days 2 and 15, respectively, until apheresis was carried out on days 10–13 and 24–27. Apheresis was stopped when at least 9 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg of body weight was obtained for the three grafts. A third cycle was permitted if the number of CD34+ cells was not achieved after the first two cycles, provided the patient was responsive to CT, or for any reason decided upon by the investigator.

The first HD-CT regimen consisted of an association of thiotepa, 400 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide, 3 g/m2, both administered in a continuous infusion over 2 days (D34 and D35). The first pack of CD34+ cells was infused on day 39. The second and the third courses (ICE) scheduled on days 62–66 and 90–94, respectively, consisted of a combination of etoposide (150 mg/m2 twice a day, in a 2-h infusion, for 5 days), ifosfamide (2000 mg/m2/day in a 3-h infusion, for 5 days) supported by sodium mercaptoethanesulfonate (mesna, in a 30-min infusion every 3 h, during a 12-h period, initiated at the same time as the ifosfamide infusion), and carboplatin (AUC 4/day, in a 6-h infusion, for 5 days). Infusion of PBSCs was planned on days 71 and 99. During the three high-dose therapies, G-CSF was administered at a daily dose of 5 µg/kg, from the day of PBSC infusion until PMN recovery (i.e. PMN >1.5 x 109/l). Each of these ICE regimens was delayed if the PMN level was less than 1.5 x 109/l and/or the platelet level was less than 100 x 109/l.

Evaluation of toxicity, response to therapy and survival
This phase II study was initially designed as a Gehan method [30Go]. The main objective of the study was the CR rate. With this aim in view, we planned to enroll 14 patients in a first phase to ensure that if no CR was observed, the study would be stopped for inefficacy (i.e. a CR rate lower than 20%). If one or more CR were observed, the protocol specified that up to 45 patients could be included in order to reduce the confidence interval (CI) of the CR rate. Secondary objectives were the overall (complete plus partial) response rate (RR), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates, toxicity and toxic death rate. The statistical analysis was done in terms of intention-to-treat. Toxicity and response to therapy were evaluated according to the ECOG and WHO criteria [31Go, 32Go].

The duration of response was calculated from the date of documented response to the date of progression. Whenever possible, patients in clinical partial response (PR) with normal tumor markers (PRm–) underwent surgery of residual masses at the end of the whole procedure. Sequential procedures were proposed in the case of multiple metastatic sites. If surgery was complete and the pathological examination did not show any viable tumor, patients were considered as complete responders. If surgery was complete and the pathological examination showed persistent viable tumor, they were considered as surgical CR [20Go]. Progression, death from treatment and withdrawal from protocol for whatever reason were considered as treatment failures.

The duration of PFS and OS was calculated from the date of inclusion to the date of progression, or death if no progression (PFS), and the date of death (OS), according to Kaplan–Meier's method [33Go]. The patients were stratified into good-, intermediate-, and poor-risk categories on the basis of a cumulative score calculated using a prognostic index proposed by Beyer et al. [20Go]. One point each was given for progressive disease before HD-CT and non-seminomatous mediastinal primary or refractory disease before HD-CT. Two points were given for HCG levels greater than 1000 mIU/ml before HD-CT or absolute refractory disease. Patients with a cumulative score greater than 2 were in the poor-prognosis group and those with a score of 0 were in the good-prognosis group.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Characteristics of the patients (Table 1)
This phase II study was carried out in 12 institutions during a 3.5-year period March 1998 to September 2001. Forty-five patients (median age: 28 years, range: 17.3–47.2) were included in the study. Median PS was 0 (range: 0–2). Among these 45 patients, 34 (75.6%) exhibited testicular cancer, six (13.3%) primary mediastinal tumors, three (6.7%) retroperitoneal GCT, one (2.2%) primary hepatic GCT, and one (2.2%) had an unknown primary GCT. Forty patients (89%) exhibited non-seminomatous GCT (NSGCT) and five (11%) a pure seminoma.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Characteristics of the patients at the time of inclusion

 
Seven patients (15.5%) were included while they progressed during their first line therapy, which was BEP for all of them. Thirty-two (71%) patients were included because they had relapsed after two lines of therapy (BEP and VeIP), and six (13.5%) entered the study after more than two lines of therapy. The median delay between day 1 of the first treatment and the day of inclusion was 11.1 months (range: 1.9–181.3).

Administration of chemotherapy (Table 2)
Four out of the 45 patients who had received the first cycle were excluded before the second cycle of CT: one died from therapy-related toxicity, three from progressive disease. Hence, 41 patients were eligible to receive the second mobilization course. Following this second course, eight patients were excluded (six for progression, one for harvest failure, and one who died from toxicity). Thirty-three patients underwent the first HD-CT course. Four were excluded after this third cycle, three for hematologic toxicity, one for toxic death. Twenty-nine patients were eligible to receive the first ICE regimen. Seven supplementary withdrawals were due to various reasons: two for progression, two toxic deaths, two for toxicity including one hemorrhagic cystitis and one hematologic toxicity, and one refusal. Finally, 22 patients (49%) were eligible to receive the complete course of treatment.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Development of the TAXIF protocol

 
The median number of CD34+ cells harvested at the end of the mobilization sequence was 10.5 x 106 CD34+/kg of BW. Harvesting was successful in 30 patients after the first course of mobilization, six required a second series of apheresis and three patients required a third course. In 10 patients, the harvest was insufficient with two cases of sepsis and one acute respiratory distress syndrome. Harvesting failed in only one patient. The median interval between each of the five cycles of CT was respected: 15 days (range: 13–21) between the first and second courses, 22 days (13–46) between the second and third courses, 32.5 days (28–55) between the third and fourth courses, and 41 days (33–71) between the fourth and fifth courses. Median dose-intensity of the chemotherapy administered was 0.94 for epirubicin and paclitaxel, 0.85 for CPM and thiotepa, 0.99 for etoposide, 1.0 for IFM and 0.92 for carboplatin.

Toxicity
The 45 patients included in the study were assessable for toxicity.

Hematologic toxicity. One hundred and seventy-four cycles of chemotherapy were assessable for hematologic toxicity, with 89 for epirubicin–paclitaxel and 85 for cycles of HD-CT. One hundred and seven courses (61.5%) were complicated by grade IV neutropenia and 79 (45.4%) by grade IV thrombocytopenia. Seven cases of grade IV anemia occurred during the therapy. The median number of red blood cell unit transfusions per patient was 15 (range: 6–26) and the median number of platelet unit transfusions per patient was 13 (range: 1–24).

Extra-hematologic toxicity. Two grade IV toxic effects consisting of cerebral hemorrhage occurred in two patients among the four exhibiting cerebral metastases. Twenty-one patients suffered from grade IV vomiting despite the use of 5-HT3 antagonists. Two reversible grade III liver toxic effects occurred, one related to the use of thiotepa and carboplatin. Four grade III and three grade IV episodes of fever were reported. One reversible IFM-related grade IV central neuropathy occurred. One patient suffered from CPM-related hemorrhagic cystitis. Finally, no grade III or IV renal toxicity was observed in this trial.

Treatment-related deaths. Five patients died from therapy-related complications: one after each of the two mobilization cycles, one after the first HD-CT cycle, and two after the first ICE cycle. The treatment-related death rate in this poor-prognosis population was 11%. Among the four patients with cerebral metastases, two died from cerebral hemorrhage, one after the first mobilization cycle and one during the first ICE regimen. Three patients (6.6%) died from non-hematologic toxicity: one from acute respiratory syndrome, one from a toxic shock syndrome during the first HD-CT course, and one from multi organ failure during the first ICE regimen.

Response to therapy (Table 3)
Two CR were observed among the first 14 patients. With a median follow-up of 31.8 months (range: 5.1–57.1), 17 patients achieved a response (overall RR 37.7%; 95% CI, 23.7–53.4). Nine patients (20%; 95% CI: 9.6–34.6) obtained a PR with negative tumor markers, four patients (8.9%; 95% CI: 2.5–21.2) obtained a PR with positive tumor markers, and four patients (8.9%; 95% CI: 2.5–21.2) obtained a clinical CR.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3. Response to therapy

 
Nine patients underwent surgery at the end of the chemotherapy sequence. Among the three patients who were in PR, two exhibited a pathological CR. The other six patients were progressive (n=2) or had disease that did not classify as CR, PR or progressive disease (n=4); salvage surgery was complete for all of them, but residual tumors were histologically active in all of them.

Survival (Figures 13)
Twenty-five patients (55.5%) died from disease progression. The median OS for the whole population was 11.8 months (95% CI: 8.3–13). The 3-year survival rate was 23.5% (95% CI: 15.2–42.4) with a plateau starting at 17 months. The median PFS time was 6 months (95% CI: 4.8–7.5) and the 3-year PFS rate was 23.5% (95% CI: 13.8–38.1), with a plateau starting at 13 months. The median time to progression was 6 months (Figure 1). According to the ‘Beyer’ classification, OS and PFS were better in patients graded as ‘0’ than in patients graded as ‘1–2’ or more (Figures 2 and 3). The 3-year PFS rate of patients graded as ‘0’ was 62%, compared with 13% for patients graded as ‘1–2’ and 0% for patients graded as ‘>2’.



View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Overall and progression-free survival of the whole population.

 


View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Progression-free survival according to ‘Beyer’ classification.

 


View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Overall survival according to ‘Beyer’ classification.

 

    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Salvage HD-CT for relapsed poor prognosis GCTs has been associated with a high RR and long-term DFS, except in absolute refractory patients, i.e. patients who never respond to therapy. In our trial, with an overall RR of 37.7%, we obtained a median OS of 11.8 months for the whole population, and a 3-year survival rate of 23.5%, with a plateau starting at 17 months. This protocol of 3 HD-CT was associated with a relatively high rate of acute non-lethal toxicity. The 11% toxic death rate, not unusual for relapsed poor prognosis patients, was partly due to cerebral hemorrhage observed in 50% of the patients exhibiting cerebral metastases. These patients should be carefully managed in terms of platelets count monitoring (maintenance of a platelets count >50 x 109/l) and cerebral irradiation could be discussed beforehand. Moreover, in order to increase the tolerance to HD-CT, decrease the acute toxicity, and notably hematopoietic and renal toxicity, the toxic death rate and finally to minimize the risk of severe delayed toxicity, such as peripheral neuropathy, chronic renal toxicity, or chemotherapy-induced cancer, less heavily pre-treated patients should be targeted [34Go].

The prognostic score predicts the outcome after HD-CT. Analysis of survival has shown that no long-term survivors were observed among the patients graded with a ‘Beyer’ score greater than 2. These results confirm that highly refractory patients and particularly patients with resistant/refractory primary mediastinal GCTs, clearly did not benefit from HD-CT. Selection of patients who could benefit from HD-CT should be respected (‘Beyer’ score 0–2) whereas new drugs (gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and paclitaxel) should be proposed within clinical trials for patients with a score greater than 2 [35Go]. Prognosis of patients graded ‘1–2’ certainly remains poor, but these patients should however be treated within HD-CT clinical trials.

Vaena et al. [36] have published similar results in their retrospective study. In a population of 80 patients who received salvage HD-CT between 1988 and 2001 and exhibited at least one poor-prognosis characteristic (platinum-refractory or absolutely platinum-refractory GCT, primary mediastinal NSGCT, HCG ≥1000 mIU/ml or alpha-fetoprotein ≥1000 ng/ml before HD-CT), the authors reported a median OS of 14.7 months, a 2-year PFS of 32%, and no relapse had occurred 2 years after HD-CT [36Go]. The optimal salvage treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory disease remains controversial [37Go]. In the 1990's, a series of HD-CT for previously treated patients yielded 15–25% lasting CR rates. These poor results have been attributed to various factors, including poor PS, refractory disease and high treatment-related death rates [38Go]. Improved results in terms of toxicity and response or survival have been observed with an earlier administration of HD-CT [14Go, 38Go–41Go]. Bhatia et al. obtained a 57% relapse-free rate (RFR) at 39 months in a population of 65 patients treated in first relapse with one or two cycles of VeIP followed by two HD cycles of carboplatin–etoposide [14Go]. In this study, patients with EGCTs were excluded and only two patients were in progression during initial cisplatin-based treatment. Response to VeIP chemotherapy before HD-CT as well as response to HD-CT itself predicted long-term DFS. Likewise, Rodenhuis et al. obtained a RFR of 54% at 37 months in a population of 35 previously CR patients treated with conventional induction and two high-dose regimens combining carboplatin, thiotepa and CPM [41Go]. However, the results of the first prospective randomized study were disappointing. The EBMT-IT-94 study failed to demonstrate the superiority of a single course of HD-CT (CARBOPEC), administered after three courses of conventional CT (VeIP or VIP) versus four courses of conventional VeIP or VIP protocols for patients with advanced GCTs, who had relapsed after previous CR or achieved an incomplete remission or failed to normalize tumor markers after first-line therapy [42Go]. Overall CR and PRm– rates were 41 and 17% in the standard arm and 44 and 18% in the HD arm, respectively. The 1 year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 48 and 52%, respectively (P= n.s.). Finally, the 3-year OS rate was 53% in the two arms.

In our study, we have tried to optimize the concept of salvage therapy. First, in view of its efficacy in controlling the progression of the disease and its ability to mobilize PBSC, we proposed to combine epirubicin and paclitaxel [21Go–25Go, 43Go, 44Go]. Secondly, we decided to give two consecutive courses of epirubicin and paclitaxel. Indeed, several studies have investigated the use of multiple paclitaxel-based salvage therapy [43Go–46Go]. Motzer et al. obtained a RFR of 41% at 30 months in a population of 37 patients treated in first relapse [43Go]. Several important differences should be underlined in this single center study: patients with brain metastases were ineligible, the only patient who developed brain metastases during induction therapy was excluded from the HD sequence, only 3% of the patients were pre-treated with more than two lines of CT, compared with 13.5% in our trial, and finally, no toxic deaths were observed during the whole sequence. Moreover, the surgical approach differed between the two studies. In our study, only nine out of the 22 patients who received the whole sequence of treatment underwent surgery; three were in PR, four had stable disease, and two were in progression. Only two of these achieved a pathological CR. In Motzer's study, 21 patients (57%) achieved a CR, of whom 18 required resection of residua; 14 patients were in CR to chemotherapy alone, defined as the disappearance of all clinical, radiographic, and biochemical evidence of disease for at least 4 weeks, and four achieved the status of CR after completing surgery. These results emphasize the role of surgery in increasing the CR rate. Shamash et al., in a small cohort of 13 relapsed or refractory patients, obtained a relapse-free survival rate of 46% at 40 months [45Go]. Rick et al. obtained a RFR of 34% at 36 months in a population of relapsed or refractory patients, but no long-term survivors were observed among the prognostically worst group of patients [46Go]. Recently, McNeish et al., using the HD ‘carboplatin–etoposide–cyclophosphamide–paclitaxel (225 mg/m2)’ regimen in a population of 36 GCT patients, reported a 1 year OS and a 1 year EFS rate of 88 and 64%, respectively, in 24 sensitive patients [47Go]. In our trial, the dose of paclitaxel was increased to 250 mg/m2 and two cycles were administered on a day 1 to 14 regimen to improve dose-intensity. A 34.1% RR was observed after these two cycles. Thirdly, considering the efficacy and availability of thiotepa in HD regimens, we introduced this drug in the first HD-CT course of our multiple program [48Go]. Fourthly, considering the therapeutic potential of multiple carboplatin-based courses, the principle of tandem HD therapy was maintained, and the second and third cycles were derived from our previously described tandem ICE protocol [13Go, 36Go, 37Go, 49Go]. The rational for a sequential approach was based on the assumption that the use of multiple semi-intensive cycles as front-line therapy may be more efficient before drug resistance develops. Moreover, several phase II studies have explored the potential role of tandem HD-CT, more likely to eradicate residual cancer cells than a single application of HD-CT [36Go, 43Go, 49Go, 50Go]. If the concept of multiple cycles of HD-CT seems promising, we can expect that its application as front-line therapy would enhance the results. It is in this spirit that Hartmann et al. have reported their experience with sequential HD VIP-chemotherapy with PBSCT as first-line treatment in 28 patients with primary mediastinal GCT. With a median follow-up of 22 months, 61% achieved a CR/PRm– status. Two-year PFS and OS rates were 54% and 64%, respectively. For the authors, these results may indicate that the use of intensive first-line treatment leads to an approximately 10% improvement in survival in patients with mediastinal GCTs [50Go].

In conclusion, these results support further studies on multiple HD-CT courses in relapsed poor prognosis GCTs. Earlier intervention should allow us to improve the results and decrease the toxicity of these sequential high dose approaches, notably the toxic death rate, which remains too high [36Go, 44Go]. Better selection criteria have to be fulfilled. The role of surgery for residual tumors after HD-CT must be recalled [51Go]. With this in mind, the Groupe d'Etudes des Tumeurs Uro-Génitales (Genito-Urinary Tract Tumor Study Group) have started the TAXIF-II protocol, targeting non-refractory patients, and in which CPM is replaced by higher dose paclitaxel (360 mg/m2), combined with higher doses of thiotepa (720 mg/m2) as reported by Fields et al. [52Go] and in which a 12 g/m2 dose of IFM is proposed, as in the original ICE regimen [13Go, 52Go]. The time has come to apply new and more intensive treatments in populations of patients who could clearly benefit from HD-CT.


    Acknowledgements
 
We thank Jean Genève and the GETUG Staff of the Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer, 101 rue de Tolbiac, 75 013 Paris, for their help in carrying out this study, all the research nurses of the Bone Marrow Transplant Units for their expert and compassionate care of our patients, and Amgen Laboratories. We are grateful to C. Theodore and S. Mann for their help in the preparation of this manuscript and editorial assistance. Presented during the 2002 ASCO Meeting, Orlando, FL, USA.

Received for publication July 14, 2004. Revision received October 12, 2004. Accepted for publication October 25, 2004.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
1. Einhorn LH. Curing metastatic testicular cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002; 99: 4592–4595.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

2. Bosl GJ, Motzer RJ. Testicular germ-cell cancer. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 242–253.[Free Full Text]

3. Benedetto P. Chemotherapy of testis cancer. Cancer Control 1999; 6: 549–559.[Medline]

4. International Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Classification. A prognostic factor-based staging for metastatic germ cell cancers. International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 595–603.

5. McCaffrey JA, Mazumdar M, Bajorin DF et al. Ifosfamide- and cisplatin-containing chemotherapy as first-line salvage therapy in germ cell tumors: response and survival. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 2559–2563.[Abstract]

6. Loehrer PJ, Gonin R, Nichols CR et al. Vinblastine plus ifosfamide plus cisplatin as initial salvage therapy in recurrent germ cell tumor. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2500–2504.[Abstract]

7. Hartmann JT, Nichols CR, Droz JP et al. Prognostic variables for response and outcome in patients with extra-gonadal germ-cell tumors. Ann Oncol 2002; 13: 1017–1028.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

8. Postmus PE, de Vries EG, de Vries-Hospars HG et al. Cyclophosphamide and VP 16-213 with autologous bone marrow transplantation: a dose escalation study. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1984; 20: 777–782.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

9. Nichols CR, Williams SD, Loehrer PJ et al. Randomized study of cisplatin dose intensity in poor-risk germ cell tumors: a South-Eastern Cancer Study Group and Southwest Oncology Group Protocol. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 1163–1172.[Abstract]

10. Nichols CR, Tricot G, Williams SD et al. Dose intensive chemotherapy in refractory germ cell cancer: a phase I–II trial of high dose carboplatin and etoposide with autologous bone marrow transplantation. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 932–939.[Abstract]

11. Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Gulati SC et al. Phase II trial of high dose carboplatin and etoposide with autologous bone marrow transplantation in first-line therapy for patients with poor-risk germ cell tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 1828–1835.[Abstract]

12. Broun ER, Nichols CR, Tricot G et al. High-dose carboplatin/VP-16 and ifosfamide with autologous bone marrow support in the treatment of refractory germ cell tumors. Bone Marrow Transplant 1991; 7: 53–56.[ISI][Medline]

13. Lotz JP, André T, Donsimoni R et al. High dose chemotherapy with ifosfamide, carboplatin and etoposide combined with autologous bone marrow transplantation for the treatment of poor-prognosis germ cell tumors and metastatic trophoblastic disease in adult. Cancer 1995; 75: 874–885.[ISI][Medline]

14. Bhatia S, Abonour R, Porcu P et al. High dose chemotherapy as initial salvage chemotherapy in patients with relapsed testicular cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 3346–3351.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

15. Rodenhuis S, De Wit R, De Mulder PH et al. A multi-centre prospective phase II study of high-dose chemotherapy in germ-cell cancer patients relapsing from complete remission. Ann Oncol 1999; 10: 1467–1473.[Abstract]

16. Brown ER, Nichols CR, Kneebone P et al. Long-term outcome of patients with relapsed and refractory germ cell tumors treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow rescue. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117: 124–128.[ISI][Medline]

17. Siegert W, Beyer J. Germ cell tumors: dose-intensive therapy. Semin Oncol 1998; 25: 215–223.[ISI][Medline]

18. Beyer J, Stenning S, Gerl A et al. High-dose versus conventional-dose first-salvage treatment in non-seminoma: a matched-pair analysis. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 19: 326a (Abstr 1255).

19. Linkesch W, Greinix HT, Hocker P. Long-term follow-up of phase I–II trial of ultra-high carboplatin, VP16, cyclophosphamide with ABMT in refractory or relapse non seminomatous germ cell tumors. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1993; 12: 232 (Abstr 717).

20. Beyer J, Kramar A, Mandanas R et al. High-dose chemotherapy as salvage treatment in germ cell tumors: a multivariate analysis of prognostic variables. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 2638–2645.[Abstract]

21. Lecesne A, Droz JP, Azab M et al. Phase II trial with single agent epirubicin as salvage chemotherapy in refractory germ cell tumors. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1990; 9: 145 (Abstr 563).

22. Madani AA, George DW, Brames JM et al. Phase II study of epirubicin plus cisplatin in refractory germ cell tumors. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2003; 22: 388 (Abstr 1557).

23. Motzer RJ, Bajorin DF, Schwartz LH et al. Phase II of trial of paclitaxel shows antitumor activity in patients with previously treated germ cell tumors. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 2277–2283.[Abstract]

24. Bokemeyer C, Beyer J, Metzner B et al. Phase II study of paclitaxel in patients with relapsed or cisplatin refractory testicular cancer. Ann Oncol 1996; 7: 31–34.[Abstract]

25. De Wit R, Louwerens M, de Mulder PH et al. Management of intermediate-prognosis germ-cell cancer: results of a phase I/II study of Taxol-BEP. Int J Cancer 1999; 83: 831–833.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

26. Bengala C, Giannessi PG, Baldini E et al. Epirubicin (EpiADM), paclitaxel (TXL) and G/GM-CSF can mobilize peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs) to support a myelosuppressive treatment in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1996; 15: 348 (Abstr 1017).

27. Veldhuis JG, Willemse PHB, Beijren JH et al. Paclitaxel, ifosfamide and cisplatin with G-CSF or recombinant human interleukin 3 and G-CSF in ovarian cancer: a feasibility study. Br J Cancer 1997; 75: 703–709.[ISI][Medline]

28. Rodenhuis S, Van der Wall E, Schornage JH et al. Development of a multiple high-dose chemotherapy regimen incorporating cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and carboplatin with peripheral stem-cell transplantation. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1994; 13: 248 (Abstr).

29. Lotz JP, Bui B, Théodore C et al. Refractory germ cell tumors (GCTs): salvage high-dose chemotherapy (HD-CT) combining 2 mobilization regimens followed by 3 HD-CT with peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT): the TAXIF regime (GETUG). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2002; 21: 187a (Abstr).

30. Gehan EA. The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chronic Dis 1961; 13: 346–353.[ISI]

31. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology group. Am J Clin Oncol 1982; 5: 649–655.[ISI][Medline]

32. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winckler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981; 47: 207–214.[ISI][Medline]

33. Kaplan ER, Meier P. Non-parametric estimation from incomplete observation. J Am Stat Assoc 1958; 53: 457–489.[ISI]

34. Merad-Boudia Z, Lotz JP, Aloulou S et al. Extra-haematological toxicity-related deaths in the treatment of solid tumors with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation: a retrospective study in a single institution. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2000; 19: 61a (Abstr 237).

35. Rick O, Kollmannsberger C, Hartmann JT et al. The role of high-dose chemotherapy in relapsed germ cell tumors. World J Surg 2004; 22: 25–32.

36. Vaena DA, Abonour R, Einhorn LH. Long-term survival after high-dose salvage chemotherapy for germ cell malignancies with adverse prognostic variables. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 4100–4104.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

37. Horwich A. Salvage therapy of germ cell tumors. Br J Cancer 1995; 71: 901–903.[ISI][Medline]

38. De Giorgi U, Papiani G, Severini G et al. High dose chemotherapy in adult patients with germ cell tumors. Cancer Control 2003; 10: 48–56.[Medline]

39. Droz JP, Kramar A, Pico JL. Prediction of long-term response after high dose chemotherapy with ABMT in the salvage treatment of non-seminomatous germ cell tumors. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 818–821.[ISI][Medline]

40. Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Bosl GJ et al. High dose carboplatin, etoposide, and cyclophosphamide for patients with refractory germ cell tumors: treatment results and prognostic factors for survival and toxicity. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1098–1105.[Abstract]

41. Rodenhuis S, Westermann A, Holtkamps MJ et al. Feasibility of multiple courses of high dose cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and carboplatin for breast cancer or germ cell cancer. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1473–1483.[Abstract]

42. Rosti G, Pico JL, Wandt H et al. High dose chemotherapy in the salvage treatment of patients failing first-line platinum chemotherapy for advanced germ-cell tumors: first results of a prospective randomized trial of the European Group for Bone and Blood Transplantation (EBMT). The IT-94 study. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2002; 21: 180a (Abstr 716).

43. Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Sheinfeld J et al. Sequential dose-intensive paclitaxel, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide salvage therapy for germ cell tumor patients. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 1173–1180.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

44. Motzer RJ, Sheinfeld J, Mazumdar M et al. Paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin second-line therapy for patients with relapsed testicular germ cell cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2413–2418.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

45. Shamash J, O'Doherty CA, Oliver RT et al. Should high dose chemotherapy be used to consolidate second or third line treatment in refractory germ cell tumours? Acta Oncol 2000; 39: 857–863.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

46. Rick O, Bokemeyer C, Beyer J et al. Salvage treatment with paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin plus high-dose carboplatin, etoposide, and thiotepa followed by autologous stem-cell rescue in patients with relapsed or refractory germ cell cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 81–88.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

47. McNeish IA, Kanfer EJ, Haynes R et al. Paclitaxel-containing high-dose chemotherapy for relapsed or refractory testicular germ cell tumours. Br J Cancer 2004; 90: 1169–1175.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

48. Antman K, Ayash L, Elias A et al. A phase II study of high-dose cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin with autologous marrow support in women with measurable advanced breast cancer responding to standard-dose chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 102–110.[Abstract]

49. Schmoll HJ, Kollmannsberger C, Metzner B et al. Long-term results of first-line sequential high-dose etoposide, ifosfamide, and cisplatin chemotherapy plus autologous stem cell support for patients with advanced metastatic germ cell cancer: an extended phase I/II study of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 4083–4091.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

50. Hartmann JT, Schleuler N, Metzner B et al. Sequential HD VIP-chemotherapy with autologous PBSC-transplantation as first-line treatment in patients with primary mediastinal non-seminomatous germ cell cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2002; 21: 186a (Abstr 741).

51. Schmoll HJ, Souchon R, Krege S et al. European consensus on diagnosis and treatment of germ cell cancer: a report of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1377–1399.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

52. Fields KF, Perkins JB, Partyka JS et al. High-dose thiotepa, novantrone, and taxol (TNT) followed by autologous stem cell transplant; results of a phase II study in women with chemoresponsive metastatic breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 49a (Abstr 182).





This Article
Abstract
Full Text (PDF)
All Versions of this Article:
16/3/411    most recent
mdi087v1
E-letters: Submit a response
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me when E-letters are posted
Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Add to My Personal Archive
Download to citation manager
Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Disclaimer
Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Articles by Lotz, J.-P.
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by Lotz, J.-P.