4.7 Article

Induction chemotherapy followed by concomitant radiotherapy and weekly cisplatin versus the same concomitant chemoradiotherapy in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a randomized phase II study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group (HeCOG) with biomarker evaluation

Journal

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 2, Pages 427-U409

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr116

Keywords

chemoradiotherapy; induction chemotherapy; nasopharyngeal carcinoma; randomized trial

Categories

Funding

  1. Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group [HE R_5G]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Concomitant administration of radiation therapy (RT) and chemotherapy with cisplatin (CCRT) is considered standard treatment in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer (LA-NPC). The role of induction chemotherapy (IC) when followed by CCRT in improving locoregional control remains controversial. Patients and methods: Totally, 141 eligible patients with LA-NPC were randomized to either three cycles of IC with cisplatin 75 mg/m(2), epirubicin 75 mg/m(2) and paclitaxel (Taxol) 175 mg/m(2) (CEP) every 3 weeks followed by definitive RT (70 Gy) and concomitant weekly infusion of cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) (investigational arm, 72 patients) or to the same CCRT regimen alone (control arm, 69 patients). Results: Sixty-two patients (86%) received three cycles of IC. No difference between the arms was observed in the number of patients who completed RT (61 versus 64, P = 018). Overall and complete response rates were very similar in the two arms and so were 3-year progression-free and overall survival rates. Grade III or IV toxic effects from IC were infrequent, apart of alopecia. Mucositis, weight loss and leukopenia were the most prominent side-effects from CCRT. Conclusion: IC with three cycles of CEP when followed by CCRT did not significantly improve response rates and/or survival compared with that of CCRT alone.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available