局部进展期鼻咽癌两种标准治疗方法的比较。

IF 0.6 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Issa Mohamad, Fawzi Abu-Hijleh, Ebrahim Mayta, Taher Abu-Hejleh, Wisam Al-Gargaz, Abdellatif Al Mousa, Ramiz Abu-Hijlih, Ali Hosni
{"title":"局部进展期鼻咽癌两种标准治疗方法的比较。","authors":"Issa Mohamad,&nbsp;Fawzi Abu-Hijleh,&nbsp;Ebrahim Mayta,&nbsp;Taher Abu-Hejleh,&nbsp;Wisam Al-Gargaz,&nbsp;Abdellatif Al Mousa,&nbsp;Ramiz Abu-Hijlih,&nbsp;Ali Hosni","doi":"10.1055/s-0042-1742724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Issa Mohamad<b>Objectives</b>  To compare outcomes and toxicity of two standard treatment approaches of advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). <b>Methods</b>  Between 2010 and 2016, patients with NPC, stage II-IVa, treated with induction chemotherapy (IC) (TPF), followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) (induction group), or CCRT, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) (PF) (no-induction group), were retrospectively reviewed. CCRT included platinum-based chemotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Survival outcomes, the pattern of failures, toxicity, and predictors for survival outcomes were evaluated. <b>Results</b>  A total of 110 patients were included, 65 in the induction group and 45 in the no-induction group. There were no significant differences in the DFS and overall survival (OS) at 3 years between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, performance status (1 vs. 0) predicted worse OS. The 3-year cumulative incidence rates for local, regional, and distant failures were 58.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.4-89%), 58.00% (95% CI: 8-88.8%), and 63.90% (95% CI: 14.1-90.2%), respectively. IC had more frequent acute grade (G) II anemia (13 vs. 1, <i>p</i>  < 0.01), late G II brain toxicity (4 vs. 1, <i>p</i>  < 0.01), and late G II dysphagia (32 vs. 11, <i>p</i>  = 0.01). <b>Conclusions</b>  Survival outcomes were comparable between the two groups. IC had more frequent acute G II anemia and late G II brain and esophageal toxicities.</p>","PeriodicalId":22053,"journal":{"name":"South Asian Journal of Cancer","volume":"11 3","pages":"223-228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c1/3a/10-1055-s-0042-1742724.PMC9803531.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Two Standard Treatment Approaches in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Issa Mohamad,&nbsp;Fawzi Abu-Hijleh,&nbsp;Ebrahim Mayta,&nbsp;Taher Abu-Hejleh,&nbsp;Wisam Al-Gargaz,&nbsp;Abdellatif Al Mousa,&nbsp;Ramiz Abu-Hijlih,&nbsp;Ali Hosni\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0042-1742724\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Issa Mohamad<b>Objectives</b>  To compare outcomes and toxicity of two standard treatment approaches of advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). <b>Methods</b>  Between 2010 and 2016, patients with NPC, stage II-IVa, treated with induction chemotherapy (IC) (TPF), followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) (induction group), or CCRT, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) (PF) (no-induction group), were retrospectively reviewed. CCRT included platinum-based chemotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Survival outcomes, the pattern of failures, toxicity, and predictors for survival outcomes were evaluated. <b>Results</b>  A total of 110 patients were included, 65 in the induction group and 45 in the no-induction group. There were no significant differences in the DFS and overall survival (OS) at 3 years between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, performance status (1 vs. 0) predicted worse OS. The 3-year cumulative incidence rates for local, regional, and distant failures were 58.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.4-89%), 58.00% (95% CI: 8-88.8%), and 63.90% (95% CI: 14.1-90.2%), respectively. IC had more frequent acute grade (G) II anemia (13 vs. 1, <i>p</i>  < 0.01), late G II brain toxicity (4 vs. 1, <i>p</i>  < 0.01), and late G II dysphagia (32 vs. 11, <i>p</i>  = 0.01). <b>Conclusions</b>  Survival outcomes were comparable between the two groups. IC had more frequent acute G II anemia and late G II brain and esophageal toxicities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22053,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South Asian Journal of Cancer\",\"volume\":\"11 3\",\"pages\":\"223-228\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c1/3a/10-1055-s-0042-1742724.PMC9803531.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South Asian Journal of Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1742724\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South Asian Journal of Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1742724","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的比较两种标准治疗晚期鼻咽癌(NPC)的疗效和毒性。方法回顾性分析2010 - 2016年期间,接受诱导化疗(IC) +同步放化疗(CCRT)(诱导组)或CCRT +辅助化疗(AC) (PF)(非诱导组)治疗的II-IVa期鼻咽癌患者。CCRT包括铂基化疗加调强放疗。对生存结果、失败模式、毒性和生存结果的预测因素进行评估。结果共纳入110例患者,其中诱导组65例,非诱导组45例。两组患者的DFS和3年总生存期(OS)无显著差异。在多变量分析中,性能状态(1 vs. 0)预示着更差的OS。局部、区域和远处失败的3年累积发病率分别为58.5%(95%可信区间[CI]: 8.4-89%)、58.00% (95% CI: 8-88.8%)和63.90% (95% CI: 14.1-90.2%)。IC患者急性(G) II级贫血发生率更高(13 vs. 1, p p p = 0.01)。结论两组患者的生存结局具有可比性。IC有更频繁的急性G期贫血和晚期G期脑和食管毒性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of Two Standard Treatment Approaches in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

Comparison of Two Standard Treatment Approaches in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

Comparison of Two Standard Treatment Approaches in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

Comparison of Two Standard Treatment Approaches in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

Issa MohamadObjectives  To compare outcomes and toxicity of two standard treatment approaches of advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Methods  Between 2010 and 2016, patients with NPC, stage II-IVa, treated with induction chemotherapy (IC) (TPF), followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) (induction group), or CCRT, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) (PF) (no-induction group), were retrospectively reviewed. CCRT included platinum-based chemotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Survival outcomes, the pattern of failures, toxicity, and predictors for survival outcomes were evaluated. Results  A total of 110 patients were included, 65 in the induction group and 45 in the no-induction group. There were no significant differences in the DFS and overall survival (OS) at 3 years between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, performance status (1 vs. 0) predicted worse OS. The 3-year cumulative incidence rates for local, regional, and distant failures were 58.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.4-89%), 58.00% (95% CI: 8-88.8%), and 63.90% (95% CI: 14.1-90.2%), respectively. IC had more frequent acute grade (G) II anemia (13 vs. 1, p  < 0.01), late G II brain toxicity (4 vs. 1, p  < 0.01), and late G II dysphagia (32 vs. 11, p  = 0.01). Conclusions  Survival outcomes were comparable between the two groups. IC had more frequent acute G II anemia and late G II brain and esophageal toxicities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
审稿时长
35 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