UK P3BEP Trial
Research type
Research Study
Full title
UK P3BEP - A randomised phase 3 trial of accelerated versus standard BEP chemotherapy for patients with intermediate and poor-risk metastatic germ cell tumours
IRAS ID
182633
Contact name
Carrie Bayliss
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Eudract number
2015-003060-37
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
12613000496718 , Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR)
Duration of Study in the UK
6 years, 0 months, 1 days
Research summary
Germ cell tumours (GCTs) account for 98% of all testicular cancers. Germ cell tumours also arise in the ovary, accounting for 1% to 2% of ovarian neoplasms. Germ cell tumours also rarely arise in the mediastinum, retroperitoneum, ovary and brain. Post-pubertal germ cell tumours represent 14% of all cancers in older adolescents.
Outcomes are excellent for most patients, however over a third of patients with metastatic disease will relapse and die despite being on best available therapy. There is a need to improve 1st line therapy results for patients classified as intermediate & poor risk.Treatment currently involves the use of a chemotherapy regimen comprising of bleomycin, etoposide, & cisplatin (BEP); coupled with surgical resection of residual metastatic disease post chemotherapy.
Early trials have demonstrated the safety, feasibility & tolerability of accelerated BEP for metastatic GCTs. These trials also indicated that the chemotherapy related toxicities were no worse than those expected from standard BEP regimen.
This is an open-label, randomised, stratified 2-arm multicentre phase 3 clinical trial in patients with intermediate or poor risk categorised GCTs undertaken in two stages. The patients will be given either 4 x 21-day cycles of BEP or 4 x 14-day cycles of BEP, followed by 4 doses of weekly bleomycin monotherapy.
The aim of the study is to determine if accelerated BEP is superior to standard BEP as a 1st line therapy for these patient groups by comparing progression-free survival in the two arms. The research team will also compare the two arms for protocol specific response, adverse events, quality of life and treatment preference, delivered dose-intensity of chemotherapy & overall survival.
REC name
London - Harrow Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/LO/0038
Date of REC Opinion
5 Apr 2017
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion