Department of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng East Road, Guangzhou 510060, P. R. China.
Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center; Guangzhou 510060, P. R. China.
Theranostics. 2017 Oct 17;7(19):4825-4835. doi: 10.7150/thno.21815. eCollection 2017.
We used randomized trials of radiotherapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy in non-metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma to investigate the survival benefit of chemoradiotherapy regimens between two/three-dimensional radiotherapy (2D/3D RT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Overall, 27 trials and 7,940 patients were included. Treatments were grouped into seven categories including RT alone, induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by RT (IC-RT), RT followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (RT-AC), IC followed by RT followed by AC (IC-RT-AC), concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (CRT), IC followed by CRT (IC-CRT), and CRT followed by AC (CRT-AC). To distinguish between 2D/3D RT and IMRT, three categories in IMRT were newly added, including CRT in IMRT, IC-CRT in IMRT, and CRT-AC in IMRT. The P score was used to rank the treatments. Both fixed- and random-effects frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analysis models were applied, which provided similar results and the same ranking. IC-CRT was the most effective regimen compared with CRT-AC and CRT in the IMRT era for overall survival (OS) (HR, 95% CI, IC-CRT vs. CRT-AC, 0.61 (0.45, 0.82); IC-CRT vs. CRT 0.65 (0.47, 0.91)), progression-free survival (PFS) (0.69 (0.54, 0.88); 0.63 (0.49, 0.80)), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (0.58 (0.28, 1.21); 0.60 (0.42, 0.85)). CRT-AC achieved the highest survival benefit compared with CRT, and IC-CRT for loco-regional relapse-free survival (LRRFS) (0.44 (0.15, 1.28); 0.72 (0.22, 2.33)). Among these 10 categories, after distinguishing between 2D/3D RT and IMRT, IC-CRT in IMRT ranked first for OS, PFS, and DMFS, and CRT-AC in IMRT ranked first for LRRFS. IC-CRT should be the most suitable regimen for loco-regionally advanced NPC in the IMRT era.
我们使用非转移性鼻咽癌的放疗(RT)联合或不联合化疗的随机试验,来研究二维/三维放疗(2D/3D RT)和调强放疗(IMRT)之间的化放疗方案对生存的获益。总体而言,纳入了 27 项试验和 7940 例患者。治疗分为七组,包括单纯放疗(RT)、诱导化疗(IC)后 RT(IC-RT)、RT 后辅助化疗(RT-AC)、IC 后 RT 后 AC(IC-RT-AC)、同期放化疗(CRT)、IC 后 CRT(IC-CRT)和 CRT 后 AC(CRT-AC)。为了区分 2D/3D RT 和 IMRT,IMRT 中新增了三个类别,包括 IMRT 中的 CRT、IMRT 中的 IC-CRT 和 IMRT 中的 CRT-AC。使用 P 评分对治疗进行排序。固定和随机效应频率主义和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析模型都得到了类似的结果和相同的排序。与 CRT-AC 和 CRT 相比,在 IMRT 时代,IC-CRT 是 OS(HR,95%CI,IC-CRT 与 CRT-AC,0.61(0.45,0.82);IC-CRT 与 CRT,0.65(0.47,0.91))、无进展生存期(PFS)(0.69(0.54,0.88);0.63(0.49,0.80))和远处转移无复发生存期(DMFS)(0.58(0.28,1.21);0.60(0.42,0.85))最有效的方案。与 CRT 相比,CRT-AC 对 LRRFS(0.44(0.15,1.28);0.72(0.22,2.33))的生存获益最高,与 CRT 相比,IC-CRT 对 LRRFS(0.44(0.15,1.28);0.72(0.22,2.33))的生存获益最高。在这 10 个类别中,在区分 2D/3D RT 和 IMRT 之后,IMRT 中的 IC-CRT 在 OS、PFS 和 DMFS 方面排名第一,而 IMRT 中的 CRT-AC 在 LRRFS 方面排名第一。在 IMRT 时代,IC-CRT 应该是局部晚期 NPC 最适合的方案。