Carboplatin-etoposide combination chemotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A retrospective study

Caubet,Matthieu; Dobi,Erion; Pozet,Astrid; Almotlak,Hamadi; Montcuquet,Philippe; Maurina,Tristan; Mouillet,Guillaume; N'guyen,Thierry; Stein,Ulrich; Thiery‑Vuillemin,Antoine; Fiteni,Frederic

doi:10.3892/mco.2015.628

Carboplatin-etoposide combination chemotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A retrospective study

Authors:
- Matthieu Caubet
- Erion Dobi
- Astrid Pozet
- Hamadi Almotlak
- Philippe Montcuquet
- Tristan Maurina
- Guillaume Mouillet
- Thierry N'guyen
- Ulrich Stein
- Antoine Thiery‑Vuillemin
- Frederic Fiteni
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Radiotherapy, University Hospital of Besançon, 25030 Besançon, France, Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of Besançon, 25030 Besançon, France, Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Besançon, 25030 Besançon, France
Published online on: August 31, 2015 https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2015.628
Pages: 1208-1212
Copyright: © Caubet et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The combination of cisplatin or carboplatin and etoposide is the standard treatment for certain poorly differentiated neuroendocrine cancers, such as small‑cell lung cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of the carboplatin‑etoposide regimen in metastatic castration‑resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). A total of 27 patients treated by carboplatin [area under the curve (AUC)=5] and etoposide (100 mg/m² intravenous infusion on days 1-3 or 75 mg orally̸day for 10 days) for mCRPC were included for analysis. The median progression‑free survival was 3.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9‑4.2] and the median overall survival (OS) was 8.1 months (95% CI: 4.06‑12.36). The main grade 3‑4 toxicities were haematological, namely anemia (33.3%), neutropenia (25.9%) and thrombocytopenia (22.2%), whereas the most common non‑hematological toxicity was asthenia (22.2%). The efficacy, compliance and safety profile were generally similar between the oral and intravenous etoposide groups. Pretreated patients with mCRPC may benefit from the carboplatin‑etoposide regimen in terms of OS. The toxicities were acceptable, without reported treatment‑related mortality. Therefore, the oral etoposide regimen may be an viable alternative for improving the quality of life of the patients. However, this regimen requires further prospective investigation to confirm its efficacy.

View Figures

View References

1	Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E and Forman D: Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 61:69–90. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Huss WJ, Gregory CW and Smith GJ: Neuroendocrine cell differentiation in the CWR22 human prostate cancer xenograft: Association with tumor cell proliferation prior to recurrence. Prostate. 60:91–97. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Jin RJ, Wang Y, Masumori N, et al: NE-10 neuroendocrine cancer promotes the LNCaP xenograft growth in castrated mice. Cancer Res. 64:5489–5495. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Di Sant'Agnese PA and Cockett AT: Neuroendocrine differentiation in prostatic malignancy. Cancer. 78:357–361. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Helpap B, Köllermann J and Oehler U: Neuroendocrine differentiation in prostatic carcinomas: Histogenesis, biology, clinical relevance and future therapeutical perspectives. Urol Int. 62:133–138. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Arriagada R, Bergman B, Dunant A, Le Chevalier T, Pignon JP and Vansteenkiste J: International Adjuvant Lung Cancer Trial Collaborative Group: Cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 350:351–360. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Loriot Y, Massard C, Gross-Goupil M, et al: Combining carboplatin and etoposide in docetaxel-pretreated patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: A prospective study evaluating also neuroendocrine features. Ann Oncol. 20:703–708. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Fléchon A, Pouessel D, Ferlay C, et al: Phase II study of carboplatin and etoposide in patients with anaplastic progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with or without neuroendocrine differentiation: Results of the French Genito-Urinary Tumor Group (GETUG) P01 trial. Ann Oncol. 22:2476–2481. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Thiery-Vuillemin A, Dobi E, Nguyen T, et al: Duration: escalation study of oral etoposide with carboplatin in patients with varied solid tumors. Anticancer Drugs. 21:958–962. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Eisenhauer EAI, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al: New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 45:228–247. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Scher HI, Halabi S, Tannock I, Morris M, Sternberg CN, Carducci MA, et al: Design and end points of clinical trials for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone: recommendations of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 26:1148–1159. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Aparicio A, Logothetis CJ and Maity SN: Understanding the lethal variant of prostate cancer: Power of examining extremes. Cancer Discov. 1:466–468. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Aparicio AM, Harzstark AL, Corn PG, et al: Platinum-based chemotherapy for variant castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 19:3621–3630. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Briasoulis E, Aravantinos G, Kouvatseas G, et al: Dose selection trial of metronomic oral vinorelbine monotherapy in patients with metastatic cancer: A Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group clinical translational study. BMC Cancer. 13:2632013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	De Bono JS, Molife LR, Sonpavde G, et al: Phase II study of eribulin mesylate (E7389) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer stratified by prior taxane therapy. Ann Oncol. 23:1241–1249. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Michaelson MD, Bellmunt J, Hudes GR, et al: Multicenter phase II study of trabectedin in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Ann Oncol. 23:1234–1240. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Yashi M, Nishihara D, Mizuno T, et al: Metronomic oral cyclophosphamide chemotherapy possibly contributes to stabilization of disease in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A prospective analysis of consecutive cases. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 12:e197–e203. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Scher HI, Fizazi K, Saad F, et al: AFFIRM Investigators: Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 367:1187–1197. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Smith DC, Smith MR, Sweeney C, et al: Cabozantinib in patients with advanced prostate cancer: Results of a phase II randomized discontinuation trial. J Clin Oncol. 31:412–419. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI