ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: For patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer (LA-NPC), concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is the standardized treatment. However, whether a weekly or triweekly cisplatin regimen should be used during CCRT is controversial. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to explore differences in the effects and toxicities of the two regimens. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (until June 10, 2022). We evaluated overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), disease-free survival (DFS) and grade ≥ 3 adverse events. The effect indices were hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs), and Review Manager software 5.4 (RevMan 5.4) was used for computations. RESULTS: We identified 7 studies in our analysis. There was no significant difference in OS (HR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.73-1.38, P = 0.99), DMFS (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.58-1.22, P = 0.36), LRFS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.63-1.32, P = 0.62) or DFS (HR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.56-1.56; P = 0.78) between the weekly and triweekly cisplatin regimens. We found that the weekly cisplatin regimen was more likely to cause grade ≥ 3 hematological toxicity events than the triweekly cisplatin regimen. In addition, subgroup analyses revealed that patients undergoing CCRT and CCRT plus adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) had similar OS or DFS. CONCLUSION: Weekly and triweekly cisplatin regimens had similar efficacy for LA-NPC. The triweekly regimen may replace the weekly regimen for LA-NPC because of lower toxicity. Larger data accumulation and more multicenter clinical trials may be needed to verify these results.
Subject(s)
Cisplatin , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms , Humans , Cisplatin/adverse effects , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma/drug therapy , Chemoradiotherapy/adverse effects , Disease-Free Survival , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Multicenter Studies as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy has long been a standardized therapy for localized advanced nasopharyngeal cancer. It is widely used in clinical applications. In contrast, NCCN guidelines highlight that the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for stage II nasopharyngeal cancer in the new era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy has not been defined. Thus, we systematically reviewed the significance of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for stage II nasopharyngeal cancer. METHODS: We searched the relevant literature in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane, extracting relevant data from the searched literature. The main items extracted were hazard ratios (HRs), risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). When the HR could not be extracted from the literature, we used Engauge Digitizer software for extraction. Data analysis was accomplished using the Review Manager 5.4 tool. RESULTS: Our study included seven articles involving 1633 cases of stage II nasopharyngeal cancer. The survival outcomes were overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.03, 95% CI (0.71-1.49), P = 0.87), progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.91, 95% CI (0.59-1.39), P = 0.66), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (HR = 1.05, 95% CI (0.57-1.93), P = 0.87), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (HR = 0.87, 95% CI (0.41-1.84), P = 0.71, P > 0.05), and locoregional failure-free survival (LFFS) (HR = 1.18, 95% CI (0.52-2.70), P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: In the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy, concurrent chemoradiotherapy and radiotherapy alone have the same survival benefits, and concurrent chemoradiotherapy increases acute hematological toxicity. Subgroup analysis showed that for people with N1 nasopharyngeal cancer at risk of distant metastases, concurrent chemoradiotherapy and radiotherapy alone also had equal survival benefits.
