Dataset Information

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies Comparing Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy With Radiotherapy Alone in the Treatment of Stage II Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The role of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in stage II nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is still controversial. Our objective is to evaluate the value of concurrent chemotherapy in stage II NPC receiving radiotherapy (RT).

Methods

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases for studies comparing CCRT versus RT alone in stage II NPC with survival outcomes and toxicities, including locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), metastasis-free survival (DMFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and grade 3–4 acute toxicities. The hazard ratios (HRs) of survival outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) of toxicities were extracted for meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis for stage N1 patients was performed to further explore whether these populations can earn benefits from concurrent chemotherapy.

Results

Nine eligible studies with a total of 4,092 patients were included. CCRT was associated with a better OS (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.44–0.82), LRFS (HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.50–0.78), and PFS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.54–0.79), but with similar DMFS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.46–1.45) compared with two-dimensional RT (2DRT) alone. However, CCRT showed no survival benefit in terms of OS (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.62–1.15), LRFS (HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.54–1.34), DMFS (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.60–1.54), and PFS (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.66–1.37) compared with intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) alone. Subgroup analyses indicated that CCRT had similar OS (HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.37–2.96), LRFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.34–1.45), DMFS (HR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.53–2.00), and PFS (HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.58–1.88) in the stage N1 populations. Meanwhile, compared to RT alone, CCRT significantly increased the incidence of grade 3–4 leukopenia (RR = 4.00, 95% CI 2.29–6.97), mucositis (RR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.16–1.77), and gastrointestinal reactions (RR = 8.76, 95% CI 2.63–29.12). No significant differences of grade 3–4 toxicity in thrombocytopenia (RR = 3.45, 95% CI 0.85–13.94) was found between the two groups.

Conclusion

For unselected patients with stage II NPC, CCRT was superior to 2DRT alone with better LRFS, PFS, and OS, while adding concurrent chemotherapy to IMRT did not significantly improve survival but exacerbated acute toxicities.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022318253.

SUBMITTER: Xu Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9317745 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone are both standard treatment regimens for managing locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. However, the results of comparisons between them in clinical trials vary. Therefore, we designed this meta-analysis to illustrate their advantages and disadvantages in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.MethodsWe thoroughly searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and then merged the effect indicators of hazard ratios and risk ratios using RevMan 5.1.ResultsSeven randomized controlled trials totaling 2,319 patients were included in our research. The synthesized results showed that induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.63-0.89, P = 0.001), progression-free survival (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.60-0.80, P < 0.001), distant metastasis-free survival (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.53-0.80, P < 0.001) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (HR = 0.68 95%, CI: 0.54-0.86, P = 0.001) versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone. It also increased the risk of anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia during concurrent chemoradiotherapy. However, the incidence of leukopenia and mucositis was similar in induction chemotherapy and induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis showed better survival outcomes with induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy than with concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone in the triweekly cisplatin subgroup (all P < 0.01), whereas induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy could only improve progression-free survival and locoregional recurrence-free survival in the weekly cisplatin subgroup (HR = 0.78, P = 0.02; and HR = 0.66, P = 0.03, respectively).ConclusionsInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy. For the weekly cisplatin regimen subgroup, it did not improve remote control or overall survival versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone, warranting further clarification.

Project description:BackgroundN-stage is related to distant metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of different nedaplatin-based chemotherapy regimens in advanced N2-3 stage NPC patients treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).Patients and methodsBetween April 2005 and December 2009, a total of 128 patients with N2-3 advanced NPC were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were treated with IMRT concurrent with 2 cycles of chemotherapy consisting of either nedaplatin plus paclitaxel (NP group, n = 67) or nedaplatin plus fluorouracil and paclitaxel (NFP group, n = 61). Two to four cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy were then administered every 21 days following concurrent chemoradiotherapy.ResultsWith a median follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), local-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) for all patients were 81.4%, 71.5%, 87.8% and 82.0%, respectively. No significant difference in PFS (66.6% vs. 76.7%, P = 0.212) and LRRFS rates (89.0% vs. 86.3%, P = 0.664) was observed between the NP and NFP groups. The 5-year OS (75.4% vs. 88.5%, P = 0.046) and DMFS (75.1% vs. 89.0%, P = 0.042) rate were superior in the NFP group compared with the NP group. The NFP group had a higher incidence of grade 3-4 acute toxicities including bone marrow suppression (leukopenia: ?2 = 3.935, P = 0.047; anemia: ?2 = 9.760, P = 0.002; thrombocytopenia: ?2 = 8.821, P = 0.003), and both liver and renal dysfunction (?2 = 5.206, P = 0.023) compared with the NP group. Late toxicities were moderate and no difference was observed between the two groups.ConclusionIMRT concurrent with nedaplatin-based chemotherapy is an advocated regimen for patients with advanced N2-3 stage NPC. Patients with advanced N2-3 stage may be better candidates for the NFP regimen although this regimen was associated with a high acute toxicity rate.