search
for
 About Bioline  All Journals  Testimonials  Membership  News


Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics
Medknow Publications on behalf of the Association of Radiation Oncologists of India (AROI)
ISSN: 0973-1482
EISSN: 0973-1482
Vol. 3, No. 3, 2007, pp. 150-152
Bioline Code: cr07039
Full paper language: English
Document type: Research Article
Document available free of charge

Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2007, pp. 150-152

 en Treatment outcome and cost-effectiveness analysis of two chemotherapeutic regimens (BEP vs. VIP) for poor-prognosis metastatic germ cell tumors
Satya, Venkata; Attili, Suresh; Chandra, Rama C; Anupama, G; Loknath, D; Bapsy, PP; Dadhich, Hemant K & Babu, Govind K

Abstract

Background: In patients with small-volume disseminated disease of germ cell tumors, cure can be achieved with four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP). However, around 20% of these cases are not curable. Strategies to improve cure rates have shown that none of the currently available modalities were superior to the others. Among the most used ones, BEP and VIP (etoposide, cisplatin, and ifosfamide) have been the most studied. However, there are no reports comparing the two, except for a few in abstract forms from southern India. Therefore, we did a treatment outcome and cost-effectiveness analysis of two chemotherapeutic regimens (BEP vs VIP) that are used in poor-prognosis metastatic germ cell tumors.
Materials and Methods: All male patients with germ cell tumors, diagnosed as having poor risk by IGCCCG, between January 2002 and December 2004 were included in the study. Clinical, laboratory, and other data were recorded. The patients were stratified into two categories on the basis of the type of chemotherapeutic regimen they received.
Results: In all, 46 patients were analyzed, with a median follow up of 26.6 months. The baseline characteristics (age, stage, PS, histology, and serum markers) were not different in the two treatment arms. There is no significant difference in the outcome with either of the chemotherapeutic modalities. VIP is less cost effective and more toxic compared to BEP.
Conclusion: In view of the greater toxicity and cost of therapy, as well as lack of either overall or disease free survival advantage, VIP is not a preferred option for patients with high-risk germ cell tumors in the Indian setting and it is still advisable to treat patients with BEP.

Keywords
Bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin, cost-effectiveness analysis, metastatic germ cell tumors, VIP

 
© Copyright 2007 Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics.
Alternative site location: http://www.cancerjournal.net/

Home Faq Resources Email Bioline
© Bioline International, 1989 - 2024, Site last up-dated on 01-Sep-2022.
Site created and maintained by the Reference Center on Environmental Information, CRIA, Brazil
System hosted by the Google Cloud Platform, GCP, Brazil