Zheng Yuming, Xue Fen, Ou Dan, Niu Xiaoshuang, Hu Chaosu, He Xiayun
Department of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Room 704, Building 1, Dong'an Road 270, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Shanghai, 200032, China.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2025 Mar 4;151(3):99. doi: 10.1007/s00432-025-06145-6.
This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the two induction chemotherapy (IC) regimens (TPF: docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil, and PF: cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil) combined with radiotherapy in young and middle aged patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC).
A retrospective analysis was conducted on 329 cases with stage III-IVA nasopharyngeal carcinoma from September 2005 to February 2017. Of the 329 cases, 253 cases underwent TPF (docetaxel: 60 mg/m on day 1, cisplatin: 25 mg/m on days 1-3, 5-fluorouracil: 500 mg/m on days 1-5, intravenous 120-h infusion), while 76 cases received the PF regimen (cisplatin: 25 mg/m on days 1-3, 5-fluorouracil: 500 mg/m on days 1-5, intravenous 120-h infusion) every 3 weeks. Radiotherapy was administered after IC with or without concurrent chemotherapy. The survival rates were assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis, and the survival curves were compared using a log‑rank test.
The 5-year and 8-year overall survival (OS) rates of the PF group and TPF group were 80.1% and 72.1%, 87.3% and 78.4% respectively (p = 0.405). There were no statistical differences in regional recurrence-free survival (RRFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates between PF and TPF groups(p = 0.585 and 0.500, respectively).The 5-year and 8-year estimated local recurrence free survival (LRFS) rates for patients in PF and TPF group were 91.1% and 78.0%, 96.2% and 93.7%, respectively (p = 0.026). Moreover, The OS, LRFS, RRFS and DMFS rates were comparable between the non CCRT or CCRT subgroup (p = 0.542, 0.319, 0.070, 0.986, respectively). Compared with PF group, the TPF group significantly increased the occurrence of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and leukopenia (p < 0.001).
PF and TPF followed by radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy performed encouraging anti-tumor effects in LA-NPC, there was no statistical significance in 5-year and 8-year OS, RRFS, and DMFS rates between two chemotherapy regimens. Compared with PF, TPF induction chemotherapy achieved more satisfactory LRFS rate in LA-NPC with acceptable toxicity.
本研究旨在评估两种诱导化疗(IC)方案(TPF:多西他赛、顺铂和5-氟尿嘧啶,以及PF:顺铂和5-氟尿嘧啶)联合放疗在中青年局部晚期鼻咽癌(LA-NPC)患者中的疗效和毒性。
对2005年9月至2017年2月期间的329例III-IVA期鼻咽癌患者进行回顾性分析。在这329例患者中,253例接受TPF方案(多西他赛:第1天60mg/m²,顺铂:第1-3天25mg/m²,5-氟尿嘧啶:第1-5天500mg/m²,静脉120小时输注),而76例每3周接受PF方案(顺铂:第1-3天25mg/m²,5-氟尿嘧啶:第1-5天500mg/m²,静脉120小时输注)。IC后给予放疗,同时或不同时进行同步化疗。采用Kaplan-Meier分析评估生存率,并使用对数秩检验比较生存曲线。
PF组和TPF组的5年和8年总生存率(OS)分别为80.1%和72.1%、87.3%和78.4%(p = 0.405)。PF组和TPF组之间的区域无复发生存率(RRFS)和远处无转移生存率(DMFS)无统计学差异(分别为p = 0.585和0.500)。PF组和TPF组患者的5年和8年估计局部无复发生存率(LRFS)分别为91.1%和78.0%、96.2%和93.7%(p = 0.026)。此外,非同步放化疗或同步放化疗亚组之间的OS、LRFS、RRFS和DMFS率相当(分别为p = 0.542、0.319、0.070、0.986)。与PF组相比,TPF组3级或4级中性粒细胞减少和白细胞减少的发生率显著增加(p < 0.001)。
PF和TPF方案联合放疗(同时或不同时进行同步化疗)在LA-NPC中表现出令人鼓舞的抗肿瘤效果,两种化疗方案之间的5年和8年OS、RRFS及DMFS率无统计学意义。与PF相比,TPF诱导化疗在LA-NPC中实现了更令人满意的LRFS率,且毒性可接受。