治疗 II 期和 T3N0M0 鼻咽癌的同期化放疗与单独放疗：系统回顾与元分析》（Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone in the Treatment of Stage II and T3N0M0 Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
{"title":"治疗 II 期和 T3N0M0 鼻咽癌的同期化放疗与单独放疗：系统回顾与元分析》（Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone in the Treatment of Stage II and T3N0M0 Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"H Zeng, H Wang, S Liu, X Xu","doi":"10.1016/j.clon.2024.10.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for Stage II and T3N0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), particularly during the shift from two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2DCRT) to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is debated.Therefore this study aims to systematically evaluate and meta-analyze survival benefits of CCRT versus radiotherapy alone for Stage II and T3N0 NPC, stratified by radiotherapy techniques.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>As of April 1, 2024, we conducted an exhaustive literature search across databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, with the aim of identifying and screening studies that compare the efficacy of CCRT versus radiotherapy alone in the treatment of Stage II and T3N0 NPC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 10 studies encompassing 5015 patients were included in this comprehensive analysis. The findings indicate that, apart from progression-free survival (PFS), CCRT did not improve survival outcomes, including overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), and failure-free survival (FFS), with all P values exceeding 0.05. Concurrently, the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events associated with CCRT was significantly elevated (odds ratio [OR] = 3.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-5.15, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with RT, the combination of 2DCRT with concurrent chemotherapy significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.46-0.71, P < 0.00001), PFS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI=0.53-0.78, P < 0.00001), DMFS (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.37-0.79, P = 0.002), and LRRFS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.49-0.82, P = 0.0005). In contrast, the combination of IMRT with concurrent chemotherapy failed to demonstrate improvements in OS, PFS, DMFS, or LRRFS, with all P values exceeding 0.05.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In contrast with RT, CCRT did not enhance survival in stage II and T3N0 NPC patients, yet caused more adverse reactions. 2DCRT combined with concurrent chemotherapy significantly improved OS, PFS, DMFS, and LRRFS, while IMRT with concurrent chemotherapy showed no clinical benefits.</p>","PeriodicalId":10403,"journal":{"name":"Clinical oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone in the Treatment of Stage II and T3N0M0 Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"H Zeng, H Wang, S Liu, X Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clon.2024.10.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for Stage II and T3N0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), particularly during the shift from two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2DCRT) to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is debated.Therefore this study aims to systematically evaluate and meta-analyze survival benefits of CCRT versus radiotherapy alone for Stage II and T3N0 NPC, stratified by radiotherapy techniques.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>As of April 1, 2024, we conducted an exhaustive literature search across databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, with the aim of identifying and screening studies that compare the efficacy of CCRT versus radiotherapy alone in the treatment of Stage II and T3N0 NPC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 10 studies encompassing 5015 patients were included in this comprehensive analysis. The findings indicate that, apart from progression-free survival (PFS), CCRT did not improve survival outcomes, including overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), and failure-free survival (FFS), with all P values exceeding 0.05. Concurrently, the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events associated with CCRT was significantly elevated (odds ratio [OR] = 3.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-5.15, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with RT, the combination of 2DCRT with concurrent chemotherapy significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.46-0.71, P < 0.00001), PFS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI=0.53-0.78, P < 0.00001), DMFS (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.37-0.79, P = 0.002), and LRRFS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.49-0.82, P = 0.0005). In contrast, the combination of IMRT with concurrent chemotherapy failed to demonstrate improvements in OS, PFS, DMFS, or LRRFS, with all P values exceeding 0.05.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In contrast with RT, CCRT did not enhance survival in stage II and T3N0 NPC patients, yet caused more adverse reactions. 2DCRT combined with concurrent chemotherapy significantly improved OS, PFS, DMFS, and LRRFS, while IMRT with concurrent chemotherapy showed no clinical benefits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2024.10.004\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2024.10.004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone in the Treatment of Stage II and T3N0M0 Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Aims: The efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for Stage II and T3N0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), particularly during the shift from two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2DCRT) to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is debated.Therefore this study aims to systematically evaluate and meta-analyze survival benefits of CCRT versus radiotherapy alone for Stage II and T3N0 NPC, stratified by radiotherapy techniques.
Materials and methods: As of April 1, 2024, we conducted an exhaustive literature search across databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, with the aim of identifying and screening studies that compare the efficacy of CCRT versus radiotherapy alone in the treatment of Stage II and T3N0 NPC.
Results: A total of 10 studies encompassing 5015 patients were included in this comprehensive analysis. The findings indicate that, apart from progression-free survival (PFS), CCRT did not improve survival outcomes, including overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), and failure-free survival (FFS), with all P values exceeding 0.05. Concurrently, the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events associated with CCRT was significantly elevated (odds ratio [OR] = 3.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-5.15, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with RT, the combination of 2DCRT with concurrent chemotherapy significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.46-0.71, P < 0.00001), PFS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI=0.53-0.78, P < 0.00001), DMFS (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.37-0.79, P = 0.002), and LRRFS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.49-0.82, P = 0.0005). In contrast, the combination of IMRT with concurrent chemotherapy failed to demonstrate improvements in OS, PFS, DMFS, or LRRFS, with all P values exceeding 0.05.
Conclusion: In contrast with RT, CCRT did not enhance survival in stage II and T3N0 NPC patients, yet caused more adverse reactions. 2DCRT combined with concurrent chemotherapy significantly improved OS, PFS, DMFS, and LRRFS, while IMRT with concurrent chemotherapy showed no clinical benefits.
期刊介绍：
Clinical Oncology is an International cancer journal covering all aspects of the clinical management of cancer patients, reflecting a multidisciplinary approach to therapy. Papers, editorials and reviews are published on all types of malignant disease embracing, pathology, diagnosis and treatment, including radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery, combined modality treatment and palliative care. Research and review papers covering epidemiology, radiobiology, radiation physics, tumour biology, and immunology are also published, together with letters to the editor, case reports and book reviews.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
