Volume 25, Issue 8 pp. 730-736
Original Article: Clinical Investigation

Chemotherapy for metastatic testicular cancer: The first nationwide multi-institutional study by the Cancer Registration Committee of the Japanese Urological Association

Takumi Shiraishi

Corresponding Author

Takumi Shiraishi

Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan

Correspondence: Takumi Shiraishi M.D., Ph.D., Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji, Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
Terukazu Nakamura

Terukazu Nakamura

Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan

Department of Urology, Saiseikai Imperial Gift Foundation, Saiseikai Suita Hospital, Osaka, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Osamu Ukimura

Osamu Ukimura

Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
on behalf of the Cancer Registration Committee of the Japanese Urological Association

the Cancer Registration Committee of the Japanese Urological Association

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 17 July 2018
Citations: 6

Abstract

Objectives

To assess clinicopathological data and oncological outcomes focused on metastatic testicular cancer patients, who received chemotherapy as the initial treatment, in the nationwide multi-institutional study by the Cancer Registration Committee of the Japanese Urological Association.

Methods

A testicular cancer survey was carried out by the Japanese Urological Association in 2011 to register newly diagnosed testicular cancers in 2005 and 2008. Among 1121 registered patients, 278 patients with metastases who received chemotherapy as the initial treatment and could be categorized by the Japanese Urological Association classification were eligible for the analysis.

Results

As first-line chemotherapy, bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin, and etoposide and cisplatin therapies were chosen for 260 patients (93.5%). As second-line therapy, vinblastine, ifosfamide and cisplatin/etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin; and paclitaxel, ifosfamide and cisplatin/paclitaxel, ifosfamide and nedaplatin therapies were carried out in 23 out of 63 (36.5%) and 29 out of 63 (46.0%) patients, respectively. The response rate and serum tumor marker normalization rate were 93.4% and 81.3% at first line, 75.4% and 60.7% at second line, and 41.7% and 16.7% at third line, respectively. The Japanese Urological Association classification (≥IIIB2 vs ≤IIIB1) and choriocarcinoma component in primary histology were independent prognostic factors of overall survival before starting chemotherapy. Furthermore, in patients with non-seminomatous germ cell tumors, serum tumor marker normalization was an independent factor that was associated with better outcome of overall survival after completion of the initial series of chemotherapies.

Conclusions

The initial accurate diagnosis and risk stratification is an important prognostic factor to achieve better oncological outcomes. In patients with non-seminomatous germ cell tumors, aiming for serum tumor marker normalization with continuous sequential chemotherapy could improve overall survival.

Conflict of interest

None declared.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.