High dose chemotherapy with stem cell support in the treatment of testicular cancer

doi:10.4252/wjsc.v7.i11.1222

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 7, Issue 11

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (6131)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Figures (1-1) series, Tables (1-6) series.

Item

Count

PDF

707

WORD

254

HTML

2624

Figures (1-1)

211

Tables (1-6)

257

Sum=4053

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

852

Download

1226

Sum=2078

Dec 26, 2015 (publication date) through Nov 5, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (0)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Stem Cells

ISSN

1948-0210

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Review

World J Stem Cells. Dec 26, 2015; 7(11): 1222-1232
Published online Dec 26, 2015. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v7.i11.1222

Table 3 High dose chemotherapy as second line treatment

Ref.	Type of study	Number of patients	Protocol	OS (%)	PFS (%)	Median follow-up (mo)
Rodenhuis et al[26]	Phase II, prospective	35	Conventional chemotherapy + HD-CTC × 2	NR	54	37
Bhatia et al[27]	Phase II, prospective	65	VeIP × 1-2 + HD-CE × 2	NR	57	39
Motzer et al[28]	Phase II, prospective	37	TI × 2 + HD-CE × 3	54	49	31
Rick et al[29]	Phase II, prospective	62	TIP × 3 + HD-CET × 1	30 (3 yr)	25 (2 yr)	36
Pico et al[30]	Phase III, prospective, randomized	135 (HDCT) vs 128 (SDCT)	VIP/VeIP × 3 + HD-CE × 1 vs VIP/VeIP × 4	53 vs 53 (3 yr)	42 vs 35 (3 yr)	45
Einhorn et al[31]	Retrospective	135	HD-CE × 2	NR	70	48
Lorch et al[32]	Phase II, prospective, randomized	111 (sequentional HDCT) vs 105 (single HDCT)	VIPx 1 + HD-CE × 3 vs VIP × 3 + HD-CE × 1	47 vs 45 (5 yr)	49 vs 39 (5 yr) P = 0.057	90
Feldman et al[33]	Phase I/II, prospective	107	TI × 2 + HD-CE × 3	52 (5 yr)	48 (5 yr)	61
Lorch et al[34]	Comparative, retrospective	821 (HDCT) vs 773 (SDCT)		53.2 vs 40.8 (5 yr) P < 0.001	49.6 vs 27.8 (2 yr) P < 0.001	NR
Selle et al[36]	Phase II, prospective	45	Epi-Tax × 2 + HD Thio-Tax + HD-ICE × 2	66% (2 yr)	50% (2 yr)	26
Berger et al[37]	Comparative, retrospective	95 (HDCT) vs 48 (SDCT)	HDCT vs SDCT	P = 0.931	Median 8 vs 42 mo P < 0.001	NR
Nieto et al[64]	Phase II, prospective	42	BEC-GDMC + BEV + HD-ICE	65% (2 yr)	63% (2 yr)	NR

BEV: Bevacizumab; Epi-Tax: Epirubicine, paclitaxel; GDMC: Gemcitabine, docetaxel, melphalan, carboplatin; HD: High dose; HD-CE: High dose carboplatin, etoposide; HD-CET: High dose carboplatin, etoposide, thiotepa; HDCT: High dose chemotherapy; HD-CTC: High dose carboplatin, thiotepa, cyclophosphamide; HD-ICE: High dose ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide; NR: Not reported; OS: Overall survival: PFS: Progression free survival; SDCT: Standard-dose chemotherapy; Thio-Tax: Thiotepa, paclitaxel; TI: Paclitexel, ifosfamide; TIP: Paclitexel, ifosfamide, cisplatin; VeIP: Vinorelbine, ifosfamid, cisplatin; VIP: Etoposide, ifosfamide, cisplatin.

Citation: Popovic L, Matovina-Brko G, Popovic M, Petrovic D, Cvetanovic A, Vukojevic J, Jovanovic D. High dose chemotherapy with stem cell support in the treatment of testicular cancer. World J Stem Cells 2015; 7(11): 1222-1232
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-0210/full/v7/i11/1222.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4252/wjsc.v7.i11.1222