Cisplatin-etoposide and carboplatin-etoposide induction chemotherapy for good-risk patients with germ cell tumors.

BACKGROUND In an attempt to reduce the toxicity of chemotherapy in good-risk testicular cancer patients the two drug combinations, cisplatin plus etoposide (EP) and carboplatin plus etoposide (EC), have been compared. METHODS Good risk was defined according to the MSKCC and IU criteria. 39 Patients have been treated with EP (cisplatin 20 mg/m2 i.v. and etoposide 100 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1 to 5), and 23 patients received EC (carboplatin 350 mg/m2 on day 1 and etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1 to 5). Four cycles of chemotherapy were given at 21- and 28-day intervals, respectively, with delays of up to 7 days in instances of leukocyte counts less than 3.0 x 10(9)/l or platelet counts less than 100 x 10(9)/l. RESULTS In the EP group 34 (87%) of 39 patients achieved CR (26 with chemotherapy alone, 8 with additional surgery). After a median follow-up of 26 (12-58) months 3 (9%) patients relapsed from CR. Currently 38 patients are alive, and 37 (94%) are NED. In the EC group 20 (87%) of 23 patients achieved CR (15 with chemotherapy alone and 5 with additional surgery). After a median follow-up of 45 (26-57) months 6 (30%) patients relapsed from CR. Currently 19 patients are alive and 17 (74%) are NED. There was no difference in survival between the two groups (p = 0.13), but in the EC group the relapse rate was higher (p = 0.052) and the proportion of patients with NED was lower (p = 0.03) in comparison with EP. Toxicity in both groups was mild and similar, but 3 EP-treated patients presented hair loss. CONCLUSIONS The study suggests that carboplatin-etoposide combination therapy is inferior to cisplatin-etoposide in patients with good-risk germ cell tumors.