Dataset Information

Induction chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of different risk locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study aimed to investigate the efficiency and toxicities of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by radiotherapy (RT) in different risk locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

Methods

A total of 1814 eligible patients with stage II-IVB disease treated with CCRT or IC plus RT were included. The overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the differences were compared using the log-rank test.

Results

Nomograms were developed to predict OS, PFS and DMFS (C-index: 0.71, 0.70 and 0.71, respectively). Patients were then divided into three different risk groups based on the scores calculated by the nomogram for OS. In the low and intermediate-risk group, no significant survival differences were observed between patients treated with IC plus RT alone and CCRT (5-year OS, 97.3% versus 95.6%, p = 0.642 and 87.6% versus 89.7%, p = 0.381, respectively; PFS, 95.9% versus 95.6%, p = 0.325 and 87.6% versus 89.0%, p = 0.160, respectively; DMFS, 97.2% versus 94.8%, p = 0.339 and 87.2% versus 89.3%, p = 0.628, respectively). However, in the high-risk group, IC plus RT displayed an unfavorable 5-year OS (71.0% versus 77.2%, p = 0.022) and PFS (69.4.0% versus 75.4%, p = 0.019) compared with CCRT. A significantly higher incidence of grade 3 and 4 adverse events was documented in patients treated with CCRT than in those treated with IC plus RT in all risk groups (p = 0.040).

Conclusion

IC followed by RT represents an alternative treatment strategy to CCRT for patients with low and intermediate-risk NPC, but it is not recommended for patients with high-risk NPC.

SUBMITTER: Liu LT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7268167 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Induction chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy <i>versus</i> concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of different risk locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Liu Li-Ting LT Liang Yu-Jing YJ Guo Shan-Shan SS Mo Hao-Yuan HY Guo Ling L Wen Yue-Feng YF Xie Hao-Jun HJ Tang Qing-Nan QN Sun Xue-Song XS Liu Sai-Lan SL Li Xiao-Yun XY Yang Jin-Hao JH Yang Zhen-Chong ZC Tang Lin-Quan LQ Chen Qiu-Yan QY Mai Hai-Qiang HQ

Therapeutic advances in medical oncology 20200602

<h4>Background</h4>This study aimed to investigate the efficiency and toxicities of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by radiotherapy (RT) in different risk locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 1814 eligible patients with stage II-IVB disease treated with CCRT or IC plus RT were included. The overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were calculated usi ...[more]

PMID: 32536983

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundConcurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (CCRT-AC) is currently recommended as the standard treatment for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NAC-CCRT) is an alternative strategy for decreasing tumor size and controlling micrometastases before main treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare survival outcomes between LA-NPC patients treated with CCRT-AC and those treated with NAC-CCRT.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included consecutive histologically confirmed LA-NPC patients that were treated with NAC-CCRT or CCRT-AC at Siriraj Hospital during the March 2010 to October 2014 study period. CCRT in both protocols consisted of 3-week cycles of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 with concurrent radiotherapy. Either NAC or AC consisted of 3-week cycles of cisplatin on day 1 and fluorouracil/leucovorin on days 1-4 for a maximum three cycles. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS). Flexible parametric survival analysis was used, because the proportional hazards assumption of Cox regression was violated.ResultsOf the 266 LA-NPC patients that received treatment during the study period, 79 received NAC-CCRT and 187 received CCRT-AC. Median follow-up was 37 months. Significantly more patients with advanced clinical stage (stage IVA-IVB) received NAC-CCRT (86% in NAC-CCRT vs. 29% in CCRT-AC; p < 0.001). Compared to CCRT-AC in crude analysis, 3-year and 5-year OS of NAC-CCRT were 72% vs. 86% and 62% vs. 75% respectively (p = 0.059). Interestingly, the 3-year and 5-year post-estimation adjusted OS was 84% and 74% for NAC-CCRT and 81% and 70% for CCRT-AC, respectively (HR: 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-1.56; p = 0.571). Also, adjusted analysis of distant-metastasis survival, NAC-CCRT showed HR was 0.79 (95% CI:0.37-1.72, p = 0.557). Conversely, adjusted analysis of locoregional relapse (LLR)-free survival revealed NAC-CCRT to have a significantly higher risk of LRR (HR: 2.18, 95% CI: 0.98-4.87; p = 0.057).ConclusionsThe results suggested that prognosis in the NAC-CCRT treated patients was not superior to that of the CCRT-AC treated individuals. In patients that receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy, locoregional relapse should be of concern. High-risk distant metastasis patients (N3 stage) that could achieve survival advantage from NAC-CCRT is an interesting and important topic for further study.

Project description:BackgroundNasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a prevalent form of head and neck cancer, particularly in specific regions with a higher incidence. The optimal treatment strategy for locally advanced NPC (stage III and IVA, LA-NPC) involves various combinations of induction chemotherapy (IC), concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), and adjuvant chemotherapy (AC), each with distinct advantages. This one institutional study aims to retrospectively analysis the efficacy and clinical outcomes of IC with CCRT (IC+CCRT), CCRT with AC (CCRT+AC), and the comprehensive approach of IC followed by CCRT and subsequently AC (IC+CCRT+AC) in the management of LA-NPC.Materials and methodsA total of 352 LA-NPC patients were included: 173 accepted IC+CCRT, 60 received CCRT+AC, and 119 underwent IC+CCRT+AC. The primary endpoints including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test.ResultsThe median follow-up was 61.2 months (1-216 months). There was no significant difference in 5-year OS and PFS between IC group and no IC group, extending the observation time to 90 months, the OS and PFS were significantly better in IC group than no IC group (OS: 76% vs. 70%,P<0.05; PFS: 76% vs. 71%, P<0.05). Patients with 1, 2, or 3 cycles of IC had higher 5-year OS and PFS than those with more than 3 cycles (1-4 cycles IC OS: 89% vs. 87% vs. 88% vs. 79%, P<0.05; 1-4 cycles IC PFS: 87% vs. 85% vs. 85% vs. 70%, P<0.05). NP regimen demonstrated higher OS and PFS than TP, PF, and TPF regimens (OS: 95% vs. 82% vs. 85% vs. 71%, P<0.05; PFS: 93% vs. 83% vs. 81% vs. 80%, P<0.05). The 5-year OS and PFS were significantly better in AC group than no AC group (OS: 82% vs. 72%, P<0.05; PFS: 81% vs. 69%, P<0.05). In the AC group, there was no differential effect of chemotherapy cycles and chemotherapy regimens on patients' OS and PFS. In the ThNh group, patients receiving IC+CCRT+AC had higher OS and PFS compared to those receiving IC+CCRT, with no significant difference in the rest (OS: 85% VS 66% P<0.05; PFS: 78% VS 62%, P<0.05).ConclusionCCRT combined with IC or AC could benefit LA-NPC patients. The IC+CCRT +AC regimen was most beneficial for NPC patients with later T and N stages.

Project description:PurposeThis large population-based analysis aims to investigate whether the additional induction chemotherapy to concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LRANPC).Patients and methodsThe study group comprised 3,980 patients who were treated either with IC+CCRT (1,888 patients) or CCRT alone (2,092 patients) between January 1998 and June 2013. Survival outcomes were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustments for confounding provided by propensity score methods. Primary outcome variables included OS and DFS.ResultsKaplan-Meier analysis showed that CCRT and IC+CCRT were of similar benefit to OS (P=0.099), whereas there was a marginal benefit of CCRT to DFS (P=0.063) in the overall cohort, which showed no differences between the two treatment regimens using multivariate Cox analysis and propensity score. Interestingly, for patients with 2D radiationtherapy (2DRT), CCRT had OS and DFS benefits for stage III, with 5-year and 10-year OS for CCRT vs IC+CCRT being 88% and 75% vs 81% and 67%, respectively (P=0.002); 5-year and 10-year DFS for CCRT vs IC+CCRT being 84% and 74% vs 76% and 66%, respectively (P=0.002). In contrast, IC + CCRT had OS and DFS benefits for stage IVa-b, with 5-year and 10-year OS for CCRT vs IC+CCRT being 71% and 55% vs 76% and 60%, respectively (P=0.037, HR=0.786); 5-year and 10-year DFS for CCRT vs IC+CCRT were 64% and 50% vs 69% and 58%, respectively (P=0.038, HR=0.801). No difference was found in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) subgroup.ConclusionOur study indicates that CCRT and IC+CCRT may have similar OS and DFS benefits for overall LRANPC. Stage-specific chemoradiotherapy may be administered based on the greatest benefit of IC+CCRT for stage IVa-b patients and CCRT alone for stage III patients received 2DRT. The optimal chemotherapy pattern in combination with IMRT needs further investigation.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02604472.

Project description:PurposeThe aims of this study focusing on Locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LANPC) were mainly two-fold: on the one hand, to establish a cut-off value to differentiate early and late failure based on prognosis after recurrence or metastasis; and on the other hand, to investigate the duration of concurrent cisplatin benefit over follow-up time. The results of our study have the potential to guide clinical practice and follow-up.MethodsIn total, 3123 patients with stage III-IVa NPC receiving Induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent cisplatin or not were analysed. The cut-off value of treatment failure was calculated using the minimum P-value approach. Random survival forest (RSF) model was to simulate the cumulative probabilities of treatment failure (locoregional recurrence and /or distant metastasis) over-time, as well as the monthly time-specific, event-occurring probabilities, for patients at different treatment groups.ResultsBased on subsequent prognosis, early locoregional failure (ELRF) should be defined as recurrence within 14 months (P = 1.47 × 10 - 3), and early distant failure (EDF) should be defined as recurrence within 20 months (P = 1.95 × 10 - 4). A cumulative cisplatin dose (CCD) > 200 mg/m2 independently reduced the risk of EDF (hazard ratio, 0.351; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.169-0.732; P = 0.005). Better failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS) were observed in concurrent chemotherapy settings ([0 mg/m2 vs. 1-200 mg/m2 vs. >200 mg/m2]: FFS: 70.4% vs. 74.4% vs. 82.6%, all P < 0.03; OS: 79.5% vs. 83.8% vs. 90.8%, all P < 0.01). In the monthly analysis, treatment failure mainly occurred during the first 4 years, and the risk of distant failure in patients treated with concurrent chemotherapy never exceeded that of patients without concurrent chemotherapy.ConclusionLocoregional failure that developed within 14 months and/or distant failure within 20 months had poorer subsequent survival. Concurrent chemotherapy provides a significant FFS benefit, primarily by reducing EDF, translating into a long-term OS benefit.

Project description:PurposeInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone are both standard treatment regimens for managing locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. However, the results of comparisons between them in clinical trials vary. Therefore, we designed this meta-analysis to illustrate their advantages and disadvantages in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.MethodsWe thoroughly searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and then merged the effect indicators of hazard ratios and risk ratios using RevMan 5.1.ResultsSeven randomized controlled trials totaling 2,319 patients were included in our research. The synthesized results showed that induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.63-0.89, P = 0.001), progression-free survival (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.60-0.80, P < 0.001), distant metastasis-free survival (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.53-0.80, P < 0.001) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (HR = 0.68 95%, CI: 0.54-0.86, P = 0.001) versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone. It also increased the risk of anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia during concurrent chemoradiotherapy. However, the incidence of leukopenia and mucositis was similar in induction chemotherapy and induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis showed better survival outcomes with induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy than with concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone in the triweekly cisplatin subgroup (all P < 0.01), whereas induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy could only improve progression-free survival and locoregional recurrence-free survival in the weekly cisplatin subgroup (HR = 0.78, P = 0.02; and HR = 0.66, P = 0.03, respectively).ConclusionsInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy. For the weekly cisplatin regimen subgroup, it did not improve remote control or overall survival versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone, warranting further clarification.