Feasibility of radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy after taxane-based induction chemotherapy for nonoperated locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas

Antonin Levy, Pierre Blanchard, Sara Bellefqih, Nacéra Brahimi, Joël Guigay, François Janot, Stéphane Temam, Nicolas Daly-Schveitzer, Jean Bourhis, Yungan Tao

    Résultats de recherche: Contribution à un journalArticleRevue par des pairs

    4 Citations (Scopus)

    Résumé

    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.

    langue originaleAnglais
    Pages (de - à)1220-1226
    Nombre de pages7
    journalAnti-Cancer Drugs
    Volume25
    Numéro de publication10
    Les DOIs
    étatPublié - 18 juil. 2014

    Contient cette citation