4.5 Article

The evaluation of adding induction chemotherapy to concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a meta-analysis

Journal

EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY
Volume 278, Issue 5, Pages 1545-1558

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-020-06218-x

Keywords

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma; Induction chemotherapy; Chemoradiotherapy; Randomized controlled trials; Meta-analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Induction chemotherapy followed by cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy significantly improves survival outcomes for patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma compared to cisplatin-based CCRT alone, but is also associated with a markedly increased risk of treatment-related adverse events.
Purpose We performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) versus cisplatin-based CCRT for patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). Methods We systematically searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase until February 29, 2020, for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The quality of the studies was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. The following outcomes of interest were analyzed: 1) progression-free survival (PFS); 2) overall survival (OS); 3) distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS); 4) locoregional failure-free survival (LRFFS); and 5) any grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). The data were pooled with the use of hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs). Subgroup, heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results After screening all studies selected from the initial search, seven trials with 2233 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to cisplatin-based CCRT alone, there was reliable evidence that IC significantly improved PFS (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.75,P < 0.00001), OS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.83,P = 0.002), DMFS (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.53-0.79,P < 0.0001) and LRFFS (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.88,P = 0.003) and was associated with a markedly increased risk of AEs (grade 3/4) during the IC and CCRT phases. No significant difference in the incidence of late AEs (grade 3/4) was observed between different arms. Conclusion Compared to cisplatin-based CCRT alone, IC followed by cisplatin-based CCRT confers real and substantial favorable survival outcomes with controllable toxicities. Therefore, it is reasonable to define IC followed by cisplatin-based CCRT as one of the standard treatment strategies for patients with LA-NPC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available