Abstract
It is now more than 50 years since Friedman [1] first demonstrated that seminoma was more sensitive to radiation than non-seminoma and it has since been standard to give a different radiation dosage. In contrast, although our group first demonstrated 18 years ago that the chemosensitivity of metastatic seminoma to single agent cisplatin was so different to that of non-seminoma, that it might be safe to treat all metastatic seminoma with single agent and only use combination to salvage the minority who fail it [2, 3], BEP combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care. With new evidence from multivariate analysis demonstrating that pure seminoma histology predicts for a better relapse free survival after cisplatin based combination therapy than non-seminoma [4] and given the increased anxiety about late second malignant events after etoposide treatment [5], renewed interest in this issue is emerging. This paper updates the results from our studies and attempts to define a subgroup of seminoma patients in whom it may be safe to use single agent platinum therapy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Friedman N. Supervoltage (1 million volts) roentgen therapy at Walter Reed General Hospital. Surg. Clin. N.Am. 1944;24:1424–32
Oliver RTD, Hope-Stone HF, Blandy JP. Justification of the use of surveillance in the management of stage 1 germ cell tumours of the testis. Br J Urol 1983;55:760–763
Oliver RTD, Love S, Ong J. Alternatives to radiotherapy in management of seminoma. Br J Urol 1990;65:61–67
Bajorin D, Mazumdar M, Meyers M et al. Metastatic germ cell tumours: modelling for response to chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1998;16(2):707–15
Horwich A, Oliver R, Wilkinson P et al. A Medical Research Council randomized trial of single agent carboplatin versus etoposide and cisplatin for advanced metastatic seminoma. Br J Cancer 2000;83: 1623–1629
Clemm T. Carboplatin versus Vinbloestin Ifosfamide and Cisplatin in Seminoma. Proc Amer Soc Clin Onc 2001
Dunn T, Schmoll H, Grunwald V, Bokemeyer C, Casper J. Comparative cytotoxicity of oxaliplatin and cisplatin in non-seminomatous germ cell cancer cell lines. Invest New Drugs 1997;15:109–14
Bozcuk H. Day 21 Post chemotherapy CT scan response: a predictor for need of post chemotherapy surgery in non-seminomatous germ cell cancer? In: BAUS 1998; 1998;Harrogate; 1998
Albers P, Bender H, Yilmaz H, Schoeneich G, Biersack HJ, Mueller SC. Positron emission tomography in the clinical staging of patients with Stage I and II testicular germ cell tumors. Urology 1999;53:808–11
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ong, J. et al. (2002). Metastatic Seminoma: Should Treatment Be Different from Non-seminoma?. In: Harnden, P., Joffe, J.K., Jones, W.G. (eds) Germ Cell Tumours V. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3281-3_54
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3281-3_54
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-3283-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-3281-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive