Is the gemcitabin-cisplatin combination the optimal induction chemotherapy for non-Asian patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC)? Insights from a cohort in northeastern Morocco.

IF 1.2 Q4 ONCOLOGY
ecancermedicalscience Pub Date : 2025-01-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3332/ecancer.2025.1829
Oumaima Talbi, Khadija Hinaje, Samia Mhirech, Kaoutar Maadin, Imad Chakri, Lamiae Amaadour, Karima Oualla, Zineb Benbrahim, Touria Bouhafa, Nawfel Mellas, Samia Arifi
{"title":"Is the gemcitabin-cisplatin combination the optimal induction chemotherapy for non-Asian patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC)? Insights from a cohort in northeastern Morocco.","authors":"Oumaima Talbi, Khadija Hinaje, Samia Mhirech, Kaoutar Maadin, Imad Chakri, Lamiae Amaadour, Karima Oualla, Zineb Benbrahim, Touria Bouhafa, Nawfel Mellas, Samia Arifi","doi":"10.3332/ecancer.2025.1829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>According to the latest guidelines for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by concomitant chemoradiation therapy is recommended as the preferred standard of care for patients with locally advanced NPC (stage III-IVA). However, the optimal regimen for IC in patients with locally advanced NPC remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study to compare the effectiveness and tolerability of two platinum-based IC regimens; gemcitabine - Cisplatin (GC), and doxorubicin-Cisplatin (DP) in the treatment of newly diagnosed locally advanced NPC. The main objective of this study was to compare efficacy, including objective response rates (ORRs), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>105 patients were satisfied with the eligibility criteria and were, therefore, selected for analysis (62 patients in the DP group and 43 in the GC group), including 65 men and 40 women, with a mean age of 49.5 years (range = 19-79 years) and a Karnofsky score ranging from 87% to 100%. 34% of patients were diagnosed at stage IVA.In the DP group, 3% of patients (2 out of 62) achieved a complete response complete response (CR), 60% achieved a partial response (PR), 25% remained stable S and 19% experienced progression. In the GC group, 2% of patients (1 out of 43) achieved a CR, 39.5% achieved a PR, 39.5% remained stable and 19% experienced progression. A statistically significant difference in PR was observed between the two groups (<i>p</i> = 0.028), and the difference in terms of progression is approaching the limit of significance (<i>p</i> = 0,06) after a median follow-up of 27 months (5.3-82). The 2-year PFS was 70% in the DP group compared to 80% in the GC group; the 2-year OS was 75% in the DP group and 90% in the GC group. No significant survival difference was observed between the two groups.Patients in the DP group exhibited less grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia but more grade 3-4 leukopenia and neutropenia compared to the GC group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with locally advanced NPC, DP-based IC demonstrated superior ORR compared with the GC regimen, with acceptable toxicity. Further studies are required to validate these results.</p>","PeriodicalId":11460,"journal":{"name":"ecancermedicalscience","volume":"19 ","pages":"1829"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11959120/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ecancermedicalscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2025.1829","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to the latest guidelines for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by concomitant chemoradiation therapy is recommended as the preferred standard of care for patients with locally advanced NPC (stage III-IVA). However, the optimal regimen for IC in patients with locally advanced NPC remains uncertain.

Purpose: We conducted a retrospective study to compare the effectiveness and tolerability of two platinum-based IC regimens; gemcitabine - Cisplatin (GC), and doxorubicin-Cisplatin (DP) in the treatment of newly diagnosed locally advanced NPC. The main objective of this study was to compare efficacy, including objective response rates (ORRs), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety.

Results: 105 patients were satisfied with the eligibility criteria and were, therefore, selected for analysis (62 patients in the DP group and 43 in the GC group), including 65 men and 40 women, with a mean age of 49.5 years (range = 19-79 years) and a Karnofsky score ranging from 87% to 100%. 34% of patients were diagnosed at stage IVA.In the DP group, 3% of patients (2 out of 62) achieved a complete response complete response (CR), 60% achieved a partial response (PR), 25% remained stable S and 19% experienced progression. In the GC group, 2% of patients (1 out of 43) achieved a CR, 39.5% achieved a PR, 39.5% remained stable and 19% experienced progression. A statistically significant difference in PR was observed between the two groups (p = 0.028), and the difference in terms of progression is approaching the limit of significance (p = 0,06) after a median follow-up of 27 months (5.3-82). The 2-year PFS was 70% in the DP group compared to 80% in the GC group; the 2-year OS was 75% in the DP group and 90% in the GC group. No significant survival difference was observed between the two groups.Patients in the DP group exhibited less grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia but more grade 3-4 leukopenia and neutropenia compared to the GC group.

Conclusion: In patients with locally advanced NPC, DP-based IC demonstrated superior ORR compared with the GC regimen, with acceptable toxicity. Further studies are required to validate these results.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
138
审稿时长
27 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信