Four Cycles of Etoposide plus Cisplatin for Patients with Good-Risk Advanced Germ Cell Tumors.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends either three cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin or four cycles of etoposide and cisplatin (EPx4) as initial chemotherapy for the treatment of good-risk germ cell tumors (GCTs). To assess the response, toxicity, and survival outcomes of EPx4, we analyzed our experience. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Response and survival outcomes, selected toxicities, and adherence to chemotherapy dose and schedule were assessed in patients with good-risk GCT who received EPx4 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 1982 and 2016. The results were compared with our past results and published data. RESULTS: Between 1982 and 2016, 944 patients with GCT were treated with EPx4, 289 who were previously reported plus 655 treated between January 2000 and August 2016. A favorable response was achieved in 928 of 944 patients (98.3%). Five-year progression-free, disease-specific, and overall survival rates were 93.9%, 98.6%, and 97.9%, respectively. Median follow-up was 7.3 years (range, 2.8 months to 35.5 years). Viable, nonteratomatous malignant GCT was present in 3.5% of 432 postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection specimens from patients with nonseminomatous GCT. Febrile neutropenia and thromboembolic events occurred in 16.0% and 8.9%, respectively, with one treatment-related death. In the more recent 655-patient cohort, full-dose EPx4 was administered to 631 (96.3%), with deviations from planned treatment driven mainly by vascular (n = 13), hematologic (n = 11), renal (n = 7), or infectious (n = 5) events. CONCLUSION: EPx4 is highly effective and well tolerated in patients with good-risk GCTs and remains a standard of care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Four cycles of etoposide and cisplatin (EPx4) is a standard-of-care regimen for all patients with good-risk germ cell tumors with a favorable response rate and disease-specific survival of 98%. Full-dose administration of etoposide and cisplatin and complete resection of residual disease lead to optimal outcomes. EPx4 should be the recommended regimen in active smokers, patients with reduced or borderline kidney function, and patients aged 50 years or older, which are patient groups at increased risk for bleomycin pulmonary toxicity. Because of a risk of acquired severe pulmonary illness, EPx4 may also be favored for patients who vape or use e-cigarettes and during ongoing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

Paclitaxel, Ifosfamide, and Cisplatin Efficacy for First-Line Treatment of Patients With Intermediate- or Poor-Risk Germ Cell Tumors.

PURPOSE: Paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (TIP) achieved complete responses (CRs) in two thirds of patients with advanced germ cell tumors (GCTs) who relapsed after first-line chemotherapy with cisplatin and etoposide with or without bleomycin. We tested the efficacy of first-line TIP in patients with intermediate- or poor-risk disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, single-arm phase II trial, previously untreated patients with International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group poor-risk or modified intermediate-risk GCTs received four cycles of TIP (paclitaxel 240 mg/m(2) over 2 days, ifosfamide 6 g/m(2) over 5 days with mesna support, and cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) over 5 days) once every 3 weeks with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support. The primary end point was the CR rate. RESULTS: Of the first 41 evaluable patients, 28 (68%) achieved a CR, meeting the primary efficacy end point. After additional accrual on an extension phase, total enrollment was 60 patients, including 40 (67%) with poor risk and 20 (33%) with intermediate risk. Thirty-eight (68%) of 56 evaluable patients achieved a CR and seven (13%) achieved partial responses with negative markers (PR-negative) for a favorable response rate of 80%. Five of seven achieving PR-negative status had seminoma and therefore did not undergo postchemotherapy resection of residual masses. Estimated 3-year progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 72% (poor risk, 63%; intermediate risk, 90%) and 91% (poor risk, 87%; intermediate risk, 100%), respectively. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities consisted primarily of reversible hematologic or electrolyte abnormalities, including neutropenic fever in 18%. CONCLUSION: TIP demonstrated efficacy as first-line therapy for intermediate- and poor-risk GCTs with an acceptable safety profile. Given higher rates of favorable response, progression-free survival, and overall survival compared with prior first-line studies, TIP warrants further study in this population.

Progression-free and overall survival in patients with relapsed/refractory germ cell tumors treated with single-agent chemotherapy: endpoints for clinical trial design.

BACKGROUND: Refractory germ cell tumor (GCT) patients have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. The identification of novel active agents may be impaired by use of response as the primary endpoint in phase 2 trials. Improved endpoints could enhance the development of new effective agents. METHODS: The characteristics and outcome of refractory GCT patients enrolled in 7 single-agent phase 2 trials conducted at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center from 1990 to 2008 were reviewed. The study agents were suramin, all-transretinoic acid, topotecan, pyrazoloacridine, temozolomide, ixabepilone, and sunitinib. The major endpoints evaluated were response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Ninety patients (87 male, 3 female) were treated. The primary tumor site was testis in 65 patients, mediastinum in 17 patients, retroperitoneum in 4 patients, and other in 4 patients. Eighty-six patients had nonseminoma, and 4 patients had pure seminoma. Best responses were 1 (1%) partial response (ixabepilone), 15 (17%) stable disease, and 74 (82%) progressive disease. Median PFS and OS were 1.0 month (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-1.3) and 4.7 months (95% CI, 3.5-6.4), respectively. Eighty-six of the 90 patients have died. The 12- and 16-week PFS rates were 9% (95% CI, 3-15%) and 6% (95% CI, 1%-11%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with refractory GCT progressed rapidly to these single agents. PFS and OS may be useful endpoints for designing phase 2 trials testing novel agents in this population. Twelve-week PFS (with comparison to the 9% benchmark rate reported herein) is the recommended endpoint for phase 2 trial design and median OS (using 4.7 months as the predicted median for the control arm) is suggested for phase 3 trials.

Phase II trial of sunitinib in patients with relapsed or refractory germ cell tumors.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) overexpression and increased angiogenesis have been proposed as having biologic importance in germ cell tumors (GCT). We conducted a single-institution phase II trial of sunitinib, an oral inhibitor of the VEGF receptor, in patients with relapsed or refractory GCT. A Simon's two-stage design was used to determine the number of patients for enrollment. Responses were assessed using a modified version of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), taking into account tumor marker changes. Dose modifications were made according to a nomogram for adverse events. Ten patients were enrolled. The first five received sunitinib 50 mg for four consecutive weeks, followed by a two-week break (4/2). Since four of five treated on this schedule had some tumor marker decline during the four-week "on" period, with subsequent rise during the two-week break, the dose was changed to 37.5 mg continuously for patients six to ten. However, only marker stabilization (no declines) was seen. Overall, there were no objective responses: Five had stable disease and five progressive disease (PD). Sunitinib was well tolerated; only one patient required a dose reduction due to grade 3 mucositis. Two patients experienced tumor-related hemorrhage (grade 3 and grade 1). All patients developed PD within three cycles. Sunitinib is well tolerated, but at standard doses, does not demonstrate significant activity in highly refractory GCT. Correlation between sunitinib treatment and tumor marker changes on the 50 mg 4/2 schedule suggest some pathways targeted by sunitinib (ie, angiogenesis) may be important to GCT biology.