Comparing cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy with EMA/CO chemotherapy for the treatment of high risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia

C. Lybol, C. M. G. Thomas, E. A. Blanken, F. C. G. J. Sweep, R. H. Verheijen, A. M. Westermann, I. A. Boere, A. K. L. Reyners, L. F. A. G. Massuger, R. Q. G. C. M. van Hoesel, P. B. Ottevanger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy (etoposide 100 mg/m(2) days 1-5, methotrexate 300 mg/m(2) day 1, cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) day 1, actinomycin D 0.6 mg/m(2) day 2 and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) day 4, EMACP) was compared to EMA/CO (etoposide 100 mg/m(2) days 1-2, methotrexate 300 mg/m(2) day 1 and actinomycin D 0.5 mg i.v. bolus day 1 and 0.5 mg/m(2) day 2, alternating with cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) day 8 and vincristine 1 mg/m(2) day 8) for the treatment of high-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN). Patients and methods: In the Netherlands, 83 patients were treated with EMACP and 103 patients with EMA/CO. Outcome measures were remission rate, median number of courses to achieve normal human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) concentrations, toxicity, recurrent disease rate and disease specific survival. Results: Remission rates were similar (EMACP 91.6%, EMA/CO 85.4%). The median number of courses of EMA/CO to reach hCG normalisation for single-agent resistant disease and primary high-risk disease was three and five courses, respectively, compared to 1.5 (p = 0.001) and three (p <0.001) courses of EMACP. Patients treated with EMACP more often developed fever, renal toxicity, nausea and diarrhoea compared to patients treated with EMA/CO. Patients treated with EMA/CO more often had anaemia, neuropathy and hepatotoxicity. Conclusion: EMACP combination chemotherapy is an effective treatment for high-risk GTN, with a remission rate comparable to EMA/CO. However, the difference in duration of treatment is only slightly shorter with EMACP. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy in the form of EMACP in this study was not proven more effective than EMA/CO. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)860-867
JournalEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England
Volume49
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Cite this