4.5 Article

Radiotherapy for elderly patients and cetuximab, a monocentric study

Journal

EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY
Volume 274, Issue 2, Pages 1061-1065

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-016-4336-3

Keywords

Elderly; Head and neck carcinoma; Radiotherapy; Cetuximab

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Concomitant radiotherapy and cetuximab association has shown superiority to exclusive radiotherapy for head and neck cancers. Data on this association are scarce for the elderly population despite its rising incidence. A retrospective monocentric data collection was performed in the Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center in France. Inclusion criteria were: age > 70 years at time of diagnosis, histologically proven head and neck epidermoid carcinoma, treated with radiotherapy combined with cetuximab. Thirty-five patients were included between 2008 and 2012. Median follow-up was 22 months. Median age was 74 years (70-86). Median performance status was 1 (0-2). Female/male sex ratio was 0.34. Tumor sites were: oropharynx (57.1 %), larynx (20 %), hypopharynx (14.3 %), oral cavity (2.9 %), nasopharynx (2.9 %), and lymph node with unknown primary (2.9 %). Using TNM classification, tumors were: T1 (5.9 %), T2 (35.3 %), T3 (35.3 %), T4 (22.9 %), N0 (28.6 %), N1 (8.6 %), N2 (48.6 %), and N3 (14.3 %). Median radiotherapy dose was 70 (60-70). RT was interrupted in 94 % of patients and the dose of cetuximab was reduced in 29 %. Median survivals were, respectively: 49 months for overall survival (standard error (SE) = 8) and 32 months for relapse-free survival (SE = 10). Two-year local-regional relapse and metastatic relapse-free survivals were, respectively, 59 % (SE = 10) and 74 % (SE = 10). Concomitant radiotherapy and cetuximab seem to be an effective therapy in the elderly population with encouraging results similar to the literature concerning its efficacy and toxicity. This treatment should be considered for patients > 70 years.

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