Current Problems in Cancer
Volume 22, Issue 3 , Pages 138-177, May 1998

High-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow or stem cell reconstitution for solid tumors

The University of Mississippi School of Medicine, Jackson Women's Cancer Center Medical Staff Mercy Hospital Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Article Outline

Abstract 

High-dose chemotherapy—in conjunction with the transplantation of either mononuclear cells harvested from the marrow or CD 34+ cells harvested from the peripheral blood—has proved effective in curing certain patients with leukemia, lymphoma, and, to a lesser extent, multiple myeloma. Though the CD 34+ therapy is a relatively new treatment and the mononuclear cell therapy is more standard, both have been successfully used to reconstitute lethally damaged hematopoietic stem cells. Allogeneic transplants have been more effective than autologous transplants against tumors, but they also pose a greater hazard of death from complications, graft-versus-host disease, and infections. More currently, this approach has been used in patients with certain solid tumors, either in a metastatic or recurrent disease setting or as an adjuvant to surgery and/or standard doses of chemotherapy in patients with a known high risk of recurrence.

Unfortunately, the majority of the studies about the impact of this therapy have been small and nonrandomized against standard therapy, and they have encompassed diverse populations of patients. This makes comparisons with contemporary standard—dose approaches—already problematic from a statistical point of view—even more dangerous because of the dissimilarity of the groups being compared. Particularly in the high-risk adjuvant setting, data suggest that those patients that meet the eligibility criteria for high-dose therapy and transplantation exhibit the prognostic factors for a positive outcome. When one compares these results with those of a more heterogeneous group of patients treated with conventional therapy, the conclusion might be drawn that high-dose therapy is superior to standard therapy, when a longer follow-up of the patients in the study will show this to be untrue. Thus there is a plea from clinicians and physicians conducting trials for prospective, randomized trials that would allow a fair comparison between high-dose therapy in combination with transplant procedures and a more conventional, standard chemotherapy, which is often less toxic and definitely less expensive.

This article reviews the data for transplantation in four tumors: breast cancer, ovarian cancer, small-cell lung cancer, and germ cell testis cancer. There is such a small number of randomized trials that an attempt must be made to compare these small high-dose therapy studies with similar, though not identical, large studies of conventional therapy. This article attempts to make those comparisons, and several conclusions are drawn, which are detailed below.

First, few data support the use of high-dose chemotherapy in any patient with recurrent and drug-resistant breast cancer or ovarian cancer. Similarly, few data support the use of high-dose approaches for patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer. For patients with metastatic breast cancer that has responded completely to conventional chemotherapy, no data suggest a survival advantage for the immediate consolidation of that response with high-dose chemotherapy. The only trial addressing this issue found that immediate transplantation led to a better disease-free survival rate, but overall survival, as compared with that of patients who received transplants at relapse, was not affected, and the study did not address the issue of the relative merits of conventional chemotherapy in either case. The only study of high-dose versus conventional chemotherapy was statistically underpowered, and it showed poorer-than-anticipated outcomes in the patients who received conventional therapy. Ongoing or recently completed trials will, it is hoped, address the many unanswered questions in this area.

For patients with high-risk, non-metastatic breast cancer, no completed and analyzed phase III randomized studies address the relative merits of conventional versus high-dose therapy. Early results from high-dose approaches suggest a better disease-free survival than has typically been observed with standard chemotherapy, but the patients who have received transplants are often highly selected and may have favorable prognostic factors as compared with the more heterogeneous groups that have received conventional therapy over the years. Several trials underway address the value of high-dose therapy in early stage, high-risk breast cancer patients (the group most likely to benefit from this type of therapy, based on the knowledge gleaned from the studies of transplants in patients with hematologic tumors), and these results are anxiously awaited by patients and health care professionals alike.

In ovarian cancer, where high-dose chemotherapy and transplantation is becoming increasingly more common, many small phase II trials have shown high response rates but short response durations, and the data currently available make it difficult to maintain enthusiasm for this approach in patients with drug-resistant or large-volume disease. Several trials underway randomized patients with demonstrated drug sensitivity and a low volume of tumors (achieved either surgically or with conventional chemotherapy) to receive either high-dose therapy or more conventional consolidation approaches. Until these trials are complete, the value of high-dose therapy will remain unknown.

There are little data regarding transplantation in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer. A single randomized trial demonstrated an outcome advantage for high-dose therapy, but the patient numbers were too small to allow any definitive conclusions to be made. Large randomized trials in this population are needed to address the value of high-dose approaches. The preferred population in which to perform these trials would be patients with limited disease who respond to initial conventional chemotherapy and are subsequently randomized to receive conventional consolidation with chest and cranial radiation or high-dose therapy with the same radiation. Survival would be the only pertinent endpoint. No trials of this sort are currently underway.

For patients with testis cancer, data suggest a clear survival benefit from high-dose chemotherapy and transplantation. Two groups of patients still have very poor outcomes—those with mediastinal primary disease and those who progress or relapse within 4 weeks of completion of standard, cisplatin-based therapy. It is unclear if high-dose approaches can salvage these patients. However, in patients whose disease recurs at a point more distant from conventional therapy, there is a potential for a long-term, disease-free survival rate that may be as much as or more than 50% better than that of patients who have been treated with conventional salvage approaches. Finally, it is now possible to identify patients who are at a high risk of a poor outcome and who are candidates for high-dose approaches as part of initial therapy. These patients are currently being studied in an intergroup, randomized trial.

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

 

Back to Article Outline

References 

  1. Appelbaum FR. The use of bone marrow and peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in the treatment of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 1996;46:146–164
  2. Antman KH, Rowlings PA, Vaughan WP, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell support for breast cancer in North America. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1870–1879
  3. Graves EJ. Detailed diagnoses and procedures. In: National Hospital Discharge Survey, 1989. Vital and Health Statistics—Series 13: Data From the National Health Survey. 108:1991;p. 1–236
  4. Canellos GP. Selection bias in trials of transplantation for metastatic breast cancer: have we picked the apple before it was ripe?. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:3169–3170
  5. Rahman ZU, Frye DK, Buzdar AU, et al.  Impact of selection process on response rate and long-term survival of potential high-dose chemotherapy candidates treated with standard-dose doxorubicin-containing chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:3171–3177
  6. Garcia-Carbonero R, Hidalgo M, Paz-Ares L, et al.  Patient selection in high-dose chemotherapy trials: relevance in high-risk breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:3178–3184
  7. Peters WP, Shpall EJ, Jones RB, et al.  High-dose combination alkylating agents with bone marrow support as initial treatment of metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6:1368–1376
  8. Kennedy MJ, Beveridge RA, Rowley SD, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy with reinfusion of purged autologous bone marrow following dose-intense induction as initial therapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991;83:920–926
  9. Crown J, Kritz A, Vahdat L, et al.  Rapid administration of multiple cycles of high-dose myelosuppressive chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:1144–1149
  10. Antman K, Ayash L, Elias A, et al.  A phase II study of high-dose cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin with autologous marrow support in women with measurable advanced breast cancer responding to standard-dose therapy. J Clin Oncol. 1992;10:102–110
  11. Ayash LJ, Elias A, Wheeler C, et al.  Double dose-intensive chemotherapy with autologous marrow and peripheral-blood progenitor-cell support for metastatic breast cancer: a feasibility study. J Clin Oncol. 1993;12:37–44
  12. Williams SF, Gilewski T, Mick R, et al.  High-dose consolidation therapy with autologous stem-cell rescue in stage IV breast cancer: follow-up report. J Clin Oncol. 1992;10:1743–1747
  13. Ghalie R, Williams SF, Valentino LA, et al.  Tandem peripheral blood progenitor cell transplants as initial therapy for metastatic breast cancer. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 1995;1:40–46
  14. Holland HK, Dix SP, Geller RB, et al.  Minimal toxicity and mortality in high-risk breast cancer patients receiving high-dose cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin plus autologous marrow/stem-cell transplantation and comprehensive supportive care. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:1156–1164
  15. Klumpp TR, Goldberg SL, Magdalinski AJ, et al.  Phase II study of high-dose cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and carboplatin (CEC) followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell rescue in women with metastatic or high risk non-metastatic breast cancer: multivariate analysis of factors affecting survival and engraftment. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1997;20:273–281
  16. Weaver CH, West WH, Schwatrzberg LS, et al.  Induction, mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC), high-dose chemotherapy and PBSC infusion in patients with untreated stage IV breast cancer: outcomes by intent to treat analysis. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1997;19:661–670
  17. Bensinger WI, Schiffman KS, Holmberg L, et al.  High-dose busulfan, melphalan, thiotepa and peripheral blood stel cell infusion for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1997;19:1183–1189
  18. Myers SE, Mick R, Williams SF. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue in women with metastatic breast cancer with involved bone marrow: a role for peripheral blood progenitor transplant. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1994;13:449–454
  19. Vaughan WP, Reed EC, Edwards B, et al.  High-dose cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and hydroxyurea with autologous hematopoietic stem cell rescue: an effective consolidation chemotherapy regimen for early metastatic breast cancer. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1994;13:619–624
  20. Dumphy FR, Spitzer G, Fornoff JE, et al.  Factors predicting long-term survival for metastatic breast cancer patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy and bone marrow support. Cancer. 1994;73:2157–2167
  21. Vincent MD, Powles TJ, Coombes RC, et al.  Late intensificationwith high-dose melphalan and autologous bone marrow support in breast cancer patients responding to conventional chemotherapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 1988;21:255–260
  22. Hortobagyi GN, Frye D, Buzdar AU, et al.  Complete remission in metastatic breast cancer: a thirteen year follow-up report. In: Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 7:1988;p. 37
  23. Roth BJ, Sledge GW, Williams SD, et al.  Methotrexate, vinblastin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in metastatic breast cancer: a phase II trial of the Hoosier Oncology Group. Cancer. 1991;68:248–252
  24. Jodrell DI, Smith IE, Mansi JL, et al.  A randomised comparison of mitoxantrone, methotrexate and mitomycin C and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-FU as first line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1991;63(5):794–798
  25. Henderson IC. Window of opportunity. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991;83:894–896
  26. Falkson G, Tormey DC, Carey P, et al.  Long-term survival of patients treated with combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1991;27:973–977
  27. Ingle JN, Foley JF, Mailliard JA, et al.  Randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil with or without estrogenic recruitment in women with metastatic breast cancer. Cancer. 1994;73:2337–2343
  28. Skeel RT, Andersen JW, Tormey DC, et al.  Combination chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer. In: Comparison of dibromodulcitol, doxorubicin, vincristine, and fluoxymesterone to thiotepe, doxorubicin, vinblastin, and fluoxymesterone: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. Cancer. 64:1989;p. 1393–1399
  29. Marschke RF, Ingle JN, Schaid DJ, et al.  Randomized clinical trial of CFP versus CMFP in women with metastatic breast cancer. Cancer. 1989;63:1931–1937
  30. Stewart DJ, Evans WK, Shepherd FA, et al.  Cyclophosphamide and fluorouracil combined with mitoxantrone versus doxorubicin for breast cancer: superiority of doxorubicin. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1897–1905
  31. Bishop JF, Dewar J, Toner GC, et al.  Paclitaxel as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer: the Taxol Investigational Trials Groups, Australia and New Zealand. Oncology. 1997;11(4 suppl 3):19–23
  32. Aisner J, Cirrincione C, Perloff M, et al.  Combination chemotherapy for metastatic or recurrent carcinoma of the breast—a randomized phase III trial comparing CAF versus VATH versus VATH alternating with CMFVP: Cancer and Leukemia Group B study 8281. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:1443–1452
  33. Bennett JM, Muss HB, Doroshow JH. A randomized multicenter trial comparing mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide, and fluorouracil with doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and fluorouracil in the therapy of metastatic breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6:1611–1620
  34. Focan C, Andrien JM, Closon MT, et al.  Dose-response relationship of epirubicin-based first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:1253–1263
  35. French Epirubicin Study Group. A prospective randomized phase II trial comparing combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, and either doxorubicin or epirubicin. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6:679–688
  36. Blomqvist C, Elomaa I, Rissanen P, et al.  Influence of treatment schedule on toxicity and efficacy of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil in metastatic breast cancer: a randomized trial comparing weekly and every-4-week administration. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:467–473
  37. Falkson G, Gelman RS, Tormey DC, et al.  Treatment of metastatic breast cancer in premenopausal women using CAF with or without oophorectomy: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:881–889
  38. Peters WP, Jones RB, Vredenburgh J, et al.  A large, prospective, randomized trial of high-dose combination alkylating agents (CPB) with autologous cellular support (ABMS) as consolidation for patients with metastatic breast cancer achieving complete remission after intensive doxorubicin-based induction therapy (AFM). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1997;37:35
  39. Bezwoda WR, Seymour L, Dansey RD. High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic rescue as primary treatment for metastatic breast cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:2483–2489
  40. Hryniuk W, Levine MN. Analysis of dose intensity for adjuvant chemotherapy trials in stage II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:1162–1170
  41. Hryniuk WM, Levine MN, Levin L. Analysis of dose intensity for chemotherapy in early (stage II) and advanced breast cancer. NCI Monogr. 1986;1:87–94
  42. Peters W. Event-free survival in 662 high-risk, stage II/IIIA breast cancer patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue. In: Proceedings of the Keystone Bone Marrow Transplant Meetings. Keystone, Colo. January 20, 1994;
  43. Crump M, Goss PE, Prince M, et al.  Outcome of extensive evaluation before adjuvant therapy in women with breast cancer and 10 or more positive axillary lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:66–69
  44. Dimitrov N, Anderson S, Fisher B, et al.  Dose intensification and increased total dose of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: findings from NSABP B-220. In: Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 13:1994;p. A58
  45. Wood WC, Budman DR, Korzun AH, et al.  Dose and dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II. node-positive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1994;330:1253–1259
  46. Peters WP, Ross M, Vredenburgh JJ, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow support as consolidation after standard-dose adjuvant therapy for high-risk primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:1132–1143
  47. De Graaf H, Willemse PH, de Vries EG, et al.  Intensive chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transfusion as primary treatment in women with breast cancer and more than five involved axillary lymph nodes. Eur J Cancer. 1994;30:150–153
  48. Haas R, Schmid H, Hahn U, et al.  Tandem high-dose therapy with ifosfamide, epirubicin, carboplatin and peripheral blood stem cell support is an effective adjuvant treatment for high-risk primary breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1997;33:372–378
  49. Somlo G, Doroshow JH, Forman SJ, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell rescue in the treatment of high-risk breast cancer: prognostic indicators of progression-free and overall survival. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2882–2893
  50. Buzzoni R, Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, et al.  Adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in the treatment of resectable breast cancer with more than three positive axillary nodes. J Clin Oncol. 1991;9:2134–2140
  51. Jones SE, Moon TE, Bonadonna G, et al.  Comparison of different trials of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II breast cancer using a natural history data base. Am J Clin Oncol. 1987;10:387–395
  52. Abeloff MD, Davidson NE, Donehower RC, et al.  Sixteen-week dose-intense chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1990;82:570–574
  53. Davidson NE, Abeloff MD. Adjuvant therapy of breast cancer. World J Surg. 1994;18:112–116
  54. Rivkin SE, Green S, Metch B, et al.  Adjuvant CMFVP versus melphalan for operable breast cancer with positive axillary nodes. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:1229–1238
  55. Misset JL, di Palma M, Delgado M, et al.  Adjuvant treatment of node-positive breast cancer with cyclophosphamide, dexorubicin, fluorouracil, and vincristine versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: final report after a 16-year median follow-up duration. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:1136–1145
  56. Senn HJ, Maibach R, Castiglione M, et al.  Adjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus chlorambucil, methotrexate, and fluorouracil—11-year results of Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research trial SAKK. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2502–2509
  57. Gradishar WJ, Tallman MS, Abrams JS. High-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:599–604
  58. Norton L. Evolving concepts in the systemic drug therapy of breast cancer. Semin Oncol. 1997;24(4 Suppl 10):3–10
  59. Horowitz M, Stiff PJ, Veum-Stone J, et al.  Outcome of autotransplants for advanced ovarian cancer. In: Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 33:1997;p. A1262
  60. Thigpen JT. Dose-intensity in ovarian cancer: hold, enough?. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1291–1293
  61. McGuire WP. How many more nails to seal the coffin of dose intensity?. Ann Oncol. 1997;8:311–313
  62. Levin L, Hryniuk WM. Dose intensity analysis of chemotherapy regimens in ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:756–767
  63. Levin L, Simon R, Hryniuk W. Importance of multiagent chemotherapy regimens in ovarian carcinoma: dose intensity analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:1732–1742
  64. Ben-David Y, Rosen B, Franssen E, et al.  Meta-analysis comparing cisplatin total dose intensity and survival. Gynecol Oncol. 1995;59:93–101
  65. McGuire WP. Ovarian cancer: experimental chemotherapy. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 1992;6:927–940
  66. Alberts DS, Liu PY, Hannigan EV, et al.  Intraperitoneal cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide versus intravenous cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide for stage III ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1950–1955
  67. Godwin AK, Meister A, O'Dwyer PJ, et al.  High resistance to cisplatin in human ovarian cancer cell lines is associated with marked increase of glutathione syntheses. In: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 89:1992;p. 3070–3074
  68. Parker RJ, Eastman A, Bostwick-Bruton F, et al.  Acquired cisplatin resistance in human ovarian cancer cells is associated with enhanced repair of cisplatin-DNA lesions and reduced drug accumulations. J Clin Invest. 1991;87:772–777
  69. Giannakakou P, Sackett D, Mickley L, et al.  Characterization of non-PGP paclitaxel resistance in the human ovarian cancer cell line A2780. In: Proc Annu Meet Am Assoc Cancer Res. 36:1995;p. A2721
  70. Lotz JP, Boulenc C, Andre T, et al.  Tandem high-dose chemotherapy with ifosfamide, carboplatin and teniposide with autologous bone marrow transplantation for the treatment of poor prognosis common epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 1996;77:2550–2559
  71. Viens P, Gravis G, Blaise D, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy with bone marrow rescue for patients with FIGO stage III or IV common epithelial ovarian carcinoma responding to first line treatment. In: Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 14:1995;p. A811
  72. Legros M, Dauplat J, Fleury J, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic rescue in patients with stage III to IV ovarian cancer: long-term results. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1302–1308
  73. Stiff PJ, Bayer R, Kerger C, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy with autologous transplantation for persistent/relapsed ovarian cancer: a multivariate analysis of survival for 100 consecutively treated patients. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1309–1317
  74. Dauplat J, Legros M, Condat P, et al.  High-dose melphalan and outologous bone marrow support for treatment of ovarian carcinoma with positive second-look laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;34:294–298
  75. Mulder PO, Willemse PH, Aalders JG, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy with autologous bone-marrow transplantation in patients with refractory ovarian cancer. Eur J Clin Oncol. 1989;25:645–649
  76. Stahel RA, Mabry M, Skarin AT, et al.  Detection of bone marrow metastases in small-cell lung cancer by monoclonal antibody. J Clin Oncol. 1985;3:455–461
  77. Brugger W, Bross KJ, Glatt M, et al.  Mobilization of tumor cells and hematopoietic progenitor cells into peripheral blood of patients with solid tumors. Blood. 1994;83:636–640
  78. Klasa RJ, Murray N, Coldman AJ. Dose-intensity meta-analysis of chemotherapy regimens in small-cell carcinoma of the lung. J Clin Oncol. 1991;9:499–508
  79. Furuse K, Kubota K, Nishiwaki Y, et al.  Phase III study of dose intensive weekly chemotherapy with recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) versus standard chemotherapy in extensive stage small-cell lung cancer. In: Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 15:1996;p. A1117
  80. Murray N, Livingston R, Shepherd F, et al.  A randomized study of CODE plus thoracic irradiation vs alternating CAV/EP for extensive stage small-cell lung cancer. In: Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 16:1997;p. A1638
  81. Sculier JP, Paesmans M, Bureau G, et al.  Multiple-drug weekly chemotherapy versus standard combination regimen in small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomized study conducted by the European Lung Cancer Working Party. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:1858–1865
  82. Stewart WP, von Pawel J, Gatzemeier U, et al.  Effects of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor and dose intensification of V-ICE chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer: a prospective randomized study of 300 patients. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:642–650
  83. Woll PJ, Hodgetts J, Lomax L, et al.  Can cytotoxic dose-intensity be increased by using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor? a randomized controlled trial of lenograstim in small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:652–659
  84. Cohen MH, Creaven PJ, Fossieck BE, et al.  Intensive chemotherapy of small-cell bronchogenic carcinoma. Cancer Treat Rep. 1977;61:349–354
  85. Figueredo AT, Hryniuk WM, Strautmanis I, et al.  Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis during high-dose chemotherapy of small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1985;3:54–64
  86. Pujol JL, Douillard JY, Riviere A, et al.  Dose-intensity of a four-drug chemotherapy regimen with or without recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a multicenter randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2082–2089
  87. Johnson DH, Einhom LH, Birch R, et al.  A randomized comparison of high-dose versus conventional-dose cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and vincristine for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a phase III trial of the Southeastern Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:1731–1738
  88. Arriagada R, Le Chevalier T, Pignon JP, et al.  Initial chemotherapeutic doses and survival in patiens with limited small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1848–1852
  89. Ihde DC, Mulshine JL, Kramer BS, et al.  Prospective randomized comparison of high-dose and standard-dose etoposide and cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with extensive stage small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:2022–2034
  90. Stewart P, Buckner CD, Thomas ED, et al.  Intensive chemoradiotherapy with autologous marrow transplantation for small cell carcinoma of the lung. Cancer Treat Rep. 1983;67:1055–1059
  91. Spitzer G, Farha P, Valdivieso M, et al.  High-dose intensification therapy with autologous bone marrow support for limited small-cell bronchogenic carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:4–13
  92. Ihde DC, Deisseroth AB, Lichter AS, et al.  Late intensive combined modality therapy followed by autologous bone marrow infusion in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:1443–1454
  93. Elias AD, Ayash L, Skarin AT, et al.  High-dose combined alkylating agent therapy with autologous stem cell support and chest radiotherapy for limited small-cell lung cancer. Chest. 1993;103:433S–435S
  94. Humblet Y, Symann M, Bosly A, et al.  Late intensification chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transplantation in selected small-cell carcinoma of the lung: a randomized study. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:1866–1873
  95. Nichols CR, Tricot G, Williams SD, et al.  Dose-intensive chemotherapy in refractory gern cell cancer—a phase I/II trial of high-dose carboplatin and etoposide with autologous bone marrow transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:932–939
  96. Mulder PO, de Vries EG, Koops HS, et al.  Chemotherapy with maximally tolerable doses of VP 16–213 and cyclophosphamide followed by autologous bone marrow transplantation for the treatment of relapsed or relapsed or refractory germ cell tumors. Eur J Clin Oncol. 1988;24:675–679
  97. Broun ER, Nichols CR, Kneebone P, et al.  Long-term outcome of patients with relapsed and refractory germ cell tumors treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow rescue. Ann Intern Med. 1992;117:124–128
  98. Barnett MJ, Coppin CML, Murray N, et al.  High-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow transplantation for patients with poor prognosis non-seminomatous germ cell tumours. Br J Cancer. 1993;68:594–598
  99. Lotz JP, Andre T, Donsimoni R, et al.  High dose chemotherapy with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide combined with autologous bone marrow transplantation for the treatment of poor-prognosis germ cell tumors and metastatic trophoblastic disease in adults. Cancer. 1995;75:874–885
  100. Broun ER, Nichol CR, Gize G, et al.  Tandem high dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transplantation for initial relapse of testicular germ cell cancer. Cancer. 1997;79:1605–1610
  101. Droz JP, Pico JL, Ghosn M, et al.  A phase II trial of early intensive chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transplantation in the treatment of poor prognosis non-seminomatous germ cell tumors. Bull Cancer. 1992;79:497–507
  102. Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Gulati SC, et al.  Phase II trial of high-dose carboplatin and etoposide with autologous bone marrow transplantation in first-line therapy for patients with poor-risk germ cell tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:1828–1835
  103. Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Bajorin DF, et al.  High-dose carboplatin, etoposide, and cyclophosphamide with autologous bone marrow transplantation in first-line therapy for patients with poor-risk germ cell tumors. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2546–2552

PII: S0147-0272(98)90005-8

Current Problems in Cancer
Volume 22, Issue 3 , Pages 138-177, May 1998

Article Tools