3.8 Article

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with paclitaxel plus carboplatin and oral metronomic chemotherapy (OMCT) in patients with technically unresectable oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)

期刊

ECANCERMEDICALSCIENCE
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

CANCER INTELLIGENCE LTD
DOI: 10.3332/ecancer.2021.1325

关键词

neoadjuvant therapy; metronomic chemotherapy; paclitaxel-carboplatin; squamous cell carcinoma; oral cavity

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The combination of paclitaxel-carboplatin and oral metronomic chemotherapy (OMCT) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy shows promising efficacy and safety in patients with unresectable oral squamous cell carcinoma, leading to favorable resection rates and survival outcomes.
A combination of maximum tolerated dose and metronomic chemotherapy schedule may lead to synergistic effects with acceptable toxicity. We assessed the efficacy and safety of this combination as neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in 14 patients with technically unresectable oral squamous cell carcinoma. They received NACT with paclitaxel-carboplatin and triple oral metronomic chemotherapy (OMCT) (methotrexate, celecoxib and erlotinib). Patients were assessed clinically and radiologically after a minimum of two cycles for resectability. Primary tumour site was buccal mucosa and oral tongue in 12 (86%) and 2 (14%) patients, respectively. The median number of NACT administered was three. The tumours of nine (65%) patients showed partial response and none of the patients had tumour progression. The tumours of nine patients (65%) were deemed resectable after NACT. Median progression free survival was 11.4 months (95% CI = 7.9-15 months) and median overall survival (OS) was not reached. OS at 15 months was 63.5% (95% CI = 37.8%-89.2%). Grade 3 or 4 haematological toxicities were seen in eight (57%) patients. Paclitaxel-carboplatin combined with OMCT is a well-tolerated and less resource intensive NACT regimen which leads to favourable resection rate and survival.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据