Abstract
Background: Platinum-etoposide (PE) chemotherapy (CH) is a globally established combination for extra-pulmonary high grade neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-G3-NEC); the optimal schedule has not been established. Methods: An international survey was designed, and completed by clinicians with an expertise in the field to assess consistency in clinical practice. Results: Seventy-five replies were received (June-Nov’17). A minority of physicians (13; 17.6%) did not take Ki-67 or morphology (9; 12.0%) into consideration for selection of CH. Most (72; 96.0%) selected PE-CH as first-line treatment for EP-G3-NEC. CH schedules varied: cisplatin-based (37/71; 52.1%), carboplatin-based (34/71; 47.9%); intravenous etoposide (64/71; 90.1%), oral etoposide (7/71; 9.9%). Choice of second-line CH depended on time to progression on PE-based first-line: if > 6 months, re-challenge with PE was the preferred choice (34; 45.9%); if < 6 months, alternative combinations such as fluoropyrimidine/irinotecan (21; 29.2%) or temozolomide/capecitabine (22; 30.6%) were used. Conclusion: Significant variation in PE regimen employed exists. Standardising clinical practice would facilitate clinical trial development.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Lamarca, A., Frizziero, M., Barriuso, J., McNamara, M. G., Hubner, R. A., & Valle, J. W. (2019). Urgent need for consensus: international survey of clinical practice exploring use of platinum-etoposide chemotherapy for advanced extra-pulmonary high grade neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-G3-NEC). Clinical and Translational Oncology, 21(7), 950–953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-018-1996-z
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.