Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2021
Adjuvant chemotherapy following combined induction chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy improves survival in N2-3-positive nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tao Hao-Yun, Liu Hui, He Fang, He Cai-Xian, Li Ran, Du Kun-Peng, Yuan Ya-Wei, Zheng Rong-Hui
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the clinical value of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) following concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (CCRT) and induction chemotherapy (ICT) in loco-regionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LANC).
METHODS: We included 839 newly diagnosed LANC patients in this study. ICT plus CCRT (ICT + CCRT group) was administered to 443 patients, and 396 patients received ACT after ICT plus CCRT (ICT + CCRT + ACT group). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were carried out. Furthermore, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance the study and control groups.
RESULTS: A total of 373 pairs of LANC patients were obtained after PSM analysis. We found that ACT following ICT + CCRT has no significant effect on improving the survival of LANC patients. By further exploring the ICT + CCRT + ACT treatment protocol, we excluded N0-1-positive patients and re-performed PSM in the ICT + CCRT and ICT + CCRT + ACT groups. Each group consisted of 237 patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that there were differences between the ICT + CCRT and ICT + CCRT + ACT groups in terms of the 5-year overall survival (OS) (78.9% vs. 85.0%, P = 0.034), disease-free survival (DFS) (73.4% vs. 81.7%, P = 0.029), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (84.9% vs. 76.0%, P = 0.019). In addition, the ICT + CCRT + ACT group had a higher incidence of grade 3/4 acute leukocytopenia/neutropenia.
CONCLUSION: Compared with ICT + CCRT, ACT following ICT plus CCRT can reduce distant metastasis of N2-3-positive LANC and improve the OS and DFS. The results demonstrated the feasibility and clinical utility of ACT following ICT plus CCRT.
METHODS: We included 839 newly diagnosed LANC patients in this study. ICT plus CCRT (ICT + CCRT group) was administered to 443 patients, and 396 patients received ACT after ICT plus CCRT (ICT + CCRT + ACT group). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were carried out. Furthermore, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance the study and control groups.
RESULTS: A total of 373 pairs of LANC patients were obtained after PSM analysis. We found that ACT following ICT + CCRT has no significant effect on improving the survival of LANC patients. By further exploring the ICT + CCRT + ACT treatment protocol, we excluded N0-1-positive patients and re-performed PSM in the ICT + CCRT and ICT + CCRT + ACT groups. Each group consisted of 237 patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that there were differences between the ICT + CCRT and ICT + CCRT + ACT groups in terms of the 5-year overall survival (OS) (78.9% vs. 85.0%, P = 0.034), disease-free survival (DFS) (73.4% vs. 81.7%, P = 0.029), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (84.9% vs. 76.0%, P = 0.019). In addition, the ICT + CCRT + ACT group had a higher incidence of grade 3/4 acute leukocytopenia/neutropenia.
CONCLUSION: Compared with ICT + CCRT, ACT following ICT plus CCRT can reduce distant metastasis of N2-3-positive LANC and improve the OS and DFS. The results demonstrated the feasibility and clinical utility of ACT following ICT plus CCRT.