Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Feb 22:12:1553-1562.
doi: 10.2147/OTT.S183483. eCollection 2019.

NACT+IMRT versus NACT+IMRT+CCRT in locoregionally advanced NPC patients: a retrospective study

Affiliations

NACT+IMRT versus NACT+IMRT+CCRT in locoregionally advanced NPC patients: a retrospective study

Xialin Chen et al. Onco Targets Ther. .

Abstract

Purpose: The outcomes and safety profiles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) + intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or NACT + IMRT + concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients were retrospectively analyzed.

Patients and methods: Between 2010 and 2014, 125 patients with stage III-IVb NPC, who were treated with IMRT (36, 28.8%) or IMRT + CCRT (89, 71.2%) following NACT, participated in the research. There were grade 3-4 toxicities during NACT or radiotherapy (RT) in NACT + IMRT group and NACT + IMRT + CCRT group.

Results: MRI within 3 months demonstrated that no patient suffered with progressive disease, 116 patients (92.8%) achieved a response rate (RR) with the complete response (CR) rate of 70.4% (88/125) and partial response (PR) rate of 22.4% (28/125), and nine patients (7.2%) showed stable disease (SD) at the primary site and metastatic nodes. Compared with NACT + IMRT group, patients in NACT + IMRT + CCRT group did not show significantly better RR (93.3% vs 91.7%, P=1.00), CR rate (71.9% vs 66.7%, P=0.67), or PR rate (21.4% vs 25%, P=0.81). There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS, P=0.114), local relapse-free survival (LRFS, P=0.124), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS, P=0.668) or progression-free survival (PFS, P=0.475) between NACT + IMRT group and NACT + IMRT + CCRT group. T classification (P=0.042) and N classification (P=0.021) were independent prognostic factors for DMFS.

Conclusion: To sum up, no significant difference was observed in combined RR, CR rate, LRFS, DMFS, PFS, or OS between the two groups.

Keywords: advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma; concurrent chemoradiotherapy; intensity modulated radiotherapy; neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Survival curves for patients Notes: (A) Overall survival (OS), (B) local relapse-free survival (LRFS), (C) distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and (D) progression-free survival (PFS) curves for patients in the NACT + IMRT and NACT + IMRT + CCRT groups were exhibited. Abbreviations: CCRT, concurrent chemotherapy; IMRT, intensity modulated radiotherapy; NACT, neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Wei KR, Zheng RS, Zhang SW, Liang ZH, Ou ZX, Chen WQ. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma incidence and mortality in China in 2010. Chin J Cancer. 2014;33(8):381–387. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vokes EE, Liebowitz DN, Weichselbaum RR. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Lancet. 1997;350(9084):1087–1091. - PubMed
    1. Chan AT, Leung SF, Ngan RK, et al. Overall survival after concurrent cisplatin-radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(7):536–539. - PubMed
    1. Al-Sarraf M, LeBlanc M, Giri PG, et al. Chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy in patients with advanced nasopharyngeal cancer: phase III randomized Intergroup study 0099. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(4):1310–1317. - PubMed
    1. Langendijk JA, Leemans CR, Buter J, Berkhof J, Slotman BJ. The additional value of chemotherapy to radiotherapy in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a meta-analysis of the published literature. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(22):4604–4612. - PubMed