Levy Antonin, Blanchard Pierre, Bellefqih Sara, Brahimi Nacéra, Guigay Joël, Janot François, Temam Stéphane, Daly-Schveitzer Nicolas, Bourhis Jean, Tao Yungan
Departments of aRadiation Oncology bMedical Oncology cHead and Neck Surgery, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France dDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Anticancer Drugs. 2014 Nov;25(10):1220-6. doi: 10.1097/CAD.0000000000000161.
To assess the use of radiotherapy (RT) or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) following taxane-based induction chemotherapy (T-ICT) in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) and to evaluate the tolerability of CRT after T-ICT. From 01/2006 to 08/2012, 173 LAHNSCC patients treated as a curative intent by T-ICT, followed by definitive RT/CRT were included in this analysis. There was an 86% objective response (OR) after ICT among 154 evaluable patients. Forty-four patients received less than three cycles (25%) and 20 received only one cycle of T-ICT. The 3-year actuarial overall survival (OS) was 49% and there was no OS difference according to the type of ICT (regimen or number of cycle) or the addition of concurrent CT (cisplatin, carboplatin, or cetuximab) to RT. In multivariate analysis (MVA), clinically involved lymph node (cN+), age more than 60 years, the absence of OR after ICT, and performance status of at least 1 predicted for a decreased OS, with hazard ratios (HR) of 2.8, 2.2, 2.1, and 2, respectively. The 3-year actuarial locoregional control (LRC) and distant control (DC) rates were 52 and 73%, respectively. In MVA, the absence of OR after ICT (HR: 3.2), cN+ (HR: 3), and age more than 60 years (HR: 1.7) were prognostic for a lower LRC whereas cN+ (HR: 4.2) and carboplatin-based T-ICT (HR: 2.9) were prognostic for a lower DC. The number of cycles (≤ 2) received during ICT was borderline significant for DC in the MVA (P=0.08). Among patients receiving less than or equal to three cycles of ICT, higher outcomes were observed in patients who received cisplatin-based T-ICT (vs. carboplatin-based T-ICT) or subsequent CRT (vs. RT). T-ICT in our experience, followed by RT or CRT, raises several questions on the role and type of induction, and the efficacy of CRT over RT. The role of RT or CRT following induction, although feasible in these advanced patients, awaits answers from randomized trials.
评估在局部晚期头颈部鳞状细胞癌(LAHNSCC)中基于紫杉烷的诱导化疗(T-ICT)后放疗(RT)或同步放化疗(CRT)的应用情况,并评估T-ICT后CRT的耐受性。2006年1月至2012年8月,173例接受T-ICT治疗且以根治为目的、随后接受确定性RT/CRT的LAHNSCC患者纳入本分析。154例可评估患者中,ICT后客观缓解率(OR)为86%。44例患者接受少于三个周期的T-ICT(25%),20例仅接受一个周期的T-ICT。3年精算总生存率(OS)为49%,根据ICT类型(方案或周期数)或RT中是否加用同步CT(顺铂、卡铂或西妥昔单抗),OS无差异。多因素分析(MVA)中,临床受累淋巴结(cN+)、年龄大于60岁、ICT后无OR以及体能状态至少为1提示OS降低,风险比(HR)分别为2.8、2.2、2.1和2。3年精算局部区域控制(LRC)率和远处控制(DC)率分别为52%和73%。MVA中,ICT后无OR(HR:3.2)、cN+(HR:3)和年龄大于60岁(HR:1.7)提示LRC较低,而cN+(HR:4.2)和基于卡铂的T-ICT(HR:2.9)提示DC较低。MVA中,ICT期间接受的周期数(≤2)对DC的影响接近显著(P=0.08)。在接受少于或等于三个周期ICT的患者中,接受基于顺铂的T-ICT(对比基于卡铂的T-ICT)或随后接受CRT(对比RT)的患者预后较好。根据我们的经验,T-ICT后进行RT或CRT引发了关于诱导的作用和类型以及CRT相对于RT的疗效等几个问题。诱导后RT或CRT的作用,尽管在这些晚期患者中可行,但仍有待随机试验给出答案。