A phase I/II study of nedaplatin and 5-fluorouracil with concurrent radiotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer

Prediction of malignant esophageal fistula in esophageal cancer using a radiomics-clinical nomogram

BACKGROUND

Malignant esophageal fistula (MEF), which occurs in 5% to 15% of esophageal cancer (EC) patients, has a poor prognosis. Accurate identification of esophageal cancer patients at high risk of MEF is challenging. The goal of this study was to build and validate a model to predict the occurrence of esophageal fistula in EC patients.

METHODS

This study retrospectively enrolled 122 esophageal cancer patients treated by chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (53 with fistula, 69 without), and all patients were randomly assigned to a training (n = 86) and a validation (n = 36) cohort. Radiomic features were extracted from pre-treatment CTs, clinically predictors were identified by logistic regression analysis. Lasso regression model was used for feature selection, and radiomics signature building. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to develop the clinical nomogram, radiomics-clinical nomogram and radiomics prediction model. The models were validated and compared by discrimination, calibration, reclassification, and clinical benefit.

RESULTS

The radiomic signature consisting of ten selected features, was significantly associated with esophageal fistula (P = 0.001). Radiomics-clinical nomogram was created by two predictors including radiomics signature and stenosis, which was identified by logistic regression analysis. The model showed good discrimination with an AUC = 0.782 (95% CI 0.684-0.8796) in the training set and 0.867 (95% CI 0.7461-0.987) in the validation set, with an AIC = 101.1, and good calibration. When compared to the clinical prediction model, the radiomics-clinical nomogram improved NRI by 0.236 (95% CI 0.153, 0.614) and IDI by 0.125 (95% CI 0.040, 0.210), P = 0.004.

CONCLUSION

We developed and validated the first radiomics-clinical nomogram for malignant esophageal fistula, which could assist clinicians in identifying patients at high risk of MEF.

Comparative clinical studies of primary chemoradiotherapy versus S-1 and nedaplatin chemotherapy against stage IVb oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multicentre open-label randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is one of the most commonly occurring devastating tumours worldwide, including in China. To date, the standard care of patients with stage IV OSCC is systemic chemotherapy and palliative care, which results in poor prognosis. However, no consensus has been established regarding the role of radiotherapy in targeting the primary tumour in patients with stage IVa OSCC. Thus, the aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of primary radiotherapy combined with S-1 and nedaplatin (NPD) chemotherapy in the patients with stage IV OSCC.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study is a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. A total of 180 eligible patients with stage IV OSCC will be randomised into a study group (90 patients) and a control group (90 patients). Patients in the study group will receive radiotherapy to the primary tumour at a dose of 50.4 Gy combined with 4-6 cycles of S-1 and NPD chemotherapy. In the control group, patients will only receive 4-6 cycles of S-1 and NPD chemotherapy. The primary and secondary outcomes will be measured. The differences between the two groups will be statistically analysed with regard to overall survival, the progression-free survival and safety. All outcomes will be ascertained before treatment, after treatment and after the follow-up period.The results of this study will provide evidence on the role of radiotherapy in patients with stage IV OSCC in China, which will show new options for patients with advanced oesophageal cancer.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of The First Hospital Affiliated of Zhengzhou University (approval number: SS-2018-04).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial has been registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1800015765) on 1 November 2018; retrospectively registered, http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with raltitrexed and nedaplatin regimen for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study reported here was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of raltitrexed and nedaplatin with concurrent radiotherapy in patients with unresectable, locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

METHODS

Eligible patients were adults with newly diagnosed untreated, unresectable esophageal cancer in stages I to IV with lymph node metastases or cervical esophageal cancer. Patients received nedaplatin 25 mg/m per day on day 1-3, raltitrexed 3 mg/m on days 1 repeated every 21 days for 2 cycles, and combined concurrent radiotherapy (2 Gy/fraction, total dose of 60 Gy).

RESULT

Thirty patients were included with squamous cell carcinoma. The median follow-up duration was 24 months. The overall response rate was 90%. The 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates for all patients were 70.4% and 55.7% with a median survival time of 30 months, and the median progression free survival was 20 month. The major toxicities were leukopenia and thrombopenia, with grade 3 to 4 leukopenia and thrombopenia were 50% and 30% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with raltitrexed and nedaplatin agents frequently caused myelosuppression but was highly active and suggested to be a promising treatment option for locally advanced ESCC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, nedaplatin, and fluorouracil for resectable esophageal cancer: A phase II study

Cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil is regarded as standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Japan, but the prognosis remains poor. We have previously described how definitive chemoradiotherapy with docetaxel, nedaplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DNF) led to a very high response rate and promising survival times. We therefore undertook a phase II trial to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant DNF. The study included patients with clinical stage Ib-III ESCC. Chemotherapy consisted of i.v. docetaxel (30 mg/m2 ) and nedaplatin (50 mg/m2 ) on days 1 and 8, and a continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2 /day) on days 1-5 and 8-12, every 3 weeks. After three courses of chemotherapy, esophagectomy was carried out. The primary end-point was the completion rate of the protocol treatment. Twenty-eight patients were enrolled (cStage Ib/II/III, 2/3/23) and all received at least two cycles of chemotherapy. Twenty-five patients underwent surgery, all of whom achieved an R0 resection, leading to a completion rate of 89.3%. The overall response rate was 87.0%. A pathological complete response was confirmed in eight (32.0%) cases. Grade 3/4 adverse events included leukopenia (32.1%), neutropenia (39.3%), febrile neutropenia (10.7%), thrombocytopenia (10.7%), and diarrhea (14.3%), but were manageable. Treatment-related deaths and major surgical complications did not occur. Estimated 2-year progression-free and overall survival rates were 70.4% and 77.2%, respectively. Thus, DNF therapy was well tolerated and deemed feasible, with a strong tumor response in a neoadjuvant setting for ESCC. This trial is registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN ID: 000014305).

Nedaplatin-based chemotherapy regimens combined with concurrent radiotherapy as first-line treatment for stage II-III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is an effective first-line treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The present study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between three nedaplatin-based regimens for CCRT of ESCC. Patients with stage II-III thoracic ESCC in China between January 2012 and May 2016 were included. Patients received esophageal ultrasonography prior to treatment. Chemotherapy was as follows: i) 100 mg/m² nedaplatin intravenously on day 1 and 70 mg/m² tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium (S-1) orally twice daily for 2 weeks; ii) 50 mg/m² nedaplatin intravenously on days 1 and 2 and 35 mg/m² docetaxel intravenously on days 1 and 8; or iii) 60 mg/m² nedaplatin intravenously on days 1 and 2. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy was used to administer a total dose of 60-66 Gy (1.8-2.0 Gy per fraction) to the primary tumor and 45-50 Gy to the subclinical region. A total of 70 patients were enrolled (median age, 66 years; range, 50-81 years). T4 disease was identified in 45 (64.3%) patients. All patients completed radiotherapy and received ≥2 chemotherapy cycles. Estimated 1-, 2- and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates were 82.9, 53.9 and 31.4%, respectively. OS and progression-free survival were similar between the three treatment groups. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicities were observed in 35 (50%) patients. The incidence of serious treatment-associated toxicities was numerically highest for the nedaplatin/docetaxel combination. Patients with thoracic ESCC had good clinical outcomes following CCRT. With similar survival rates and disease responses yet lower hematological toxicities, nedaplatin/S-1 and single-agent nedaplatin may be preferable to nedaplatin/docetaxel. Poor control of distant metastasis may be a disadvantage of single-agent chemotherapy use in CCRT, and a further study with larger cohorts is required to confirm this.

Comparison of Nedaplatin- and Cisplatin-Based Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer Patients: A Propensity Score Analysis

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of using nedaplatin to replace cisplatin for concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced cervical cancer.

Methods

The medical records of 155 patients with cervical cancer who had undergone CCRT with cisplatin (n = 85) or nedaplatin (n = 70) between January 2012 and January 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score analysis with 1:1 matching with the nearest neighbor matching method was performed to assess response rates, progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity between 2 groups.

Results

Propensity score matching identified 63 patients in each group. After matching, compared with patients treated with cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CisRT), we found that patients treated with nedaplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NedaRT) had a significant higher recurrence rate (25.4% vs 42.9%; P = 0.04). In addition, the 3-year progression-free survival rate for NedaRT group was also worse than that for the CisRT group (52.2% vs 63.4%, P = 0.03). There was no difference in the overall response rates between the CisRT and NedaRT groups (87.3% and 90.5%, respectively; P = 0.57). The rates of 3-year overall survival and grades 3 to 4 toxicities were similar between the 2 groups.

Conclusions

The clinical outcome of this cohort of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with CCRT did in no way provide support for the use of nedaplatin in place of cisplatin in chemoradiation and demonstrated no equivalence of the 2 drugs. Cautions should be taken for the replacement among platinum complexes in cancer treatment.

Cocktail without hangover: in search for the optimal chemotherapy in the combined management of non-operable esophageal carcinomas

BACKGROUND

The worldwide incidence of esophageal cancer has greatly increased over the past few decades making it the sixth deadliest cancer. The disease is often detected in advanced stages when surgery is no longer an option. The standard treatment in these situations is combined chemoradiotherapy, by employing drug cocktails that lead to optimal treatment outcomes both from the perspective of tumor control and normal tissue toxicity.

METHODS

The aim of this work was to collate the existing trials and clinical studies reported on non-operable esophageal cancer and to analyze the results based on treatment outcomes after various drug combinations.

RESULTS

Of all drug combinations, cisplatin/5-FU is the most well established chemotherapy regimen for esophageal cancer as both neoadjuvant therapy, an alternative option to surgery, and for palliative purposes. Although this regimen is associated with the most toxicity, it also appears to have the best survival benefit and relief of symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

More research is warranted to further increase the therapeutic ratio in non-operable esophageal cancers.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with elective lymph node irradiation for esophageal cancer: a systemic review and pooled analysis of the literature

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) has been accepted as the standard non-surgical treatment for esophageal cancer. However, no consistent conclusions have been reached whether elective lymph node irradiation (ENI) should be delivered. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and pooled analysis to evaluate the value of CCRT with ENI. A literature search based on PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar was carried out and all of the studies were evaluated carefully regarding with survival outcomes, response rates, patterns of failure rates and acute/late toxicities. Twenty-two studies were identified based on the criteria: median overall survival time was 21.0 months; pooled response rates were 56.8% (CR) and 85.8% (CR+PR), respectively; residual disease rate, local-regional recurrence rate, distant failure rate and both (local-regional recurrence plus distant failure) rate was 28%, 21%, 11%, and 7%, respectively; hematologic toxicities were the most sever acute toxicities and esophagus-related toxicity was the most common radiation-related toxicity both in acute (15.7%) and late (6.2%) phase. In conclusion, ENI is feasible with acceptable toxicities in esophageal carcinoma and the efficacy should be verified in randomized trials.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is less controlled at delayed phase in patients with esophageal cancer: a prospective registration study by the CINV Study Group of Japan

Chemotherapy is an indispensable therapeutic approach for esophageal cancer. Although chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most crucial adverse events, the current state of CINV in patients with esophageal cancer remains unclear. This multicenter prospective observational study analyzed data for 192 patents with esophageal cancer who underwent moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). The patients recorded their CINV incidence and severity daily for 7 days after receiving chemotherapy, using visual analog scales (VAS). Of the 192 patients, 181 received HEC including cisplatin, and 11 patients received MEC including nedaplatin. Approximately 81% of HEC and 82% of MEC patients received antiemetic therapy in compliance with guidelines. Although CINV was controlled relatively well in the early phase (days 1-4), it was not fully controlled in late phase (days 5-7) for both the HEC and MEC groups. Female sex was a major risk factor for delayed vomiting (P=0.034). Multivariate logistic regression analysis for VAS revealed that motion sickness, age, and use of other antiemetics were risk factors for delayed nausea. Adherence to antiemetic guidelines effectively controls vomiting but is less effective against delayed CINV in both HEC and MEC patients. Identification of individual risk factors, such as female sex, will help develop personalized treatments for CINV. In the clinical setting for esophageal cancer, regimens that include nedaplatin might need to be treated as HEC.

Influence of XRCC4 expression in esophageal cancer cells on the response to radiotherapy

DNA double-strand break (DSB) is one of the most serious forms of damage induced by ionizing irradiation and is mainly repaired by the non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) repair. Immunohistochemical analysis of proteins involved in NHEJ, such as XRCC4 (X-ray repair cross-complementing protein 4), Ku86 and DNA-PKcs (DNA-dependent protein kinase, catalytic subunits), may be useful for predicting tumor radiosensitivity. We examined 92 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ECSS) who were treated by radiotherapy between 1999 and 2008. Immunohistochemical examination of tumor tissue for Ki-67 and DSB-related proteins, including XRCC4, Ku86, and DNA-PKcs, was performed using pretreatment biopsy specimens. Low expression of XRCC4 was detected in 31 of 92 examined samples (33.7 %). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 67.7 % in the low expression group and 31.0 % in the high expression group (P = 0.00). Multivariate analysis confirmed that advanced T-stage (HR 3.24, P = 0.01), radiation dose less than 66 Gy (HR 2.23, P = 0.02), absence of systemic chemotherapy (HR 2.59, P = 0.05), and high expression of XRCC4 (HR 12.0, P = 0.02) were independent prognostic factors for predicting poor OS. Other DSB-related proteins and Ki-67 were not predictive factors. XRCC4 expression might have an influence on results of radiotherapy for patients with ESCC.

Clinical efficacy of nedaplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy for uterine cervical cancer: a Tohoku Gynecologic Cancer Unit Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of nedaplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with that of cisplatin-based CCRT in patients with cervical cancer.

METHODS

The medical records of patients with cervical cancer who had undergone CCRT between 2003 and 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 129 patients were treated postoperatively with CCRT (n = 52) or primary CCRT (n = 77). A total of 29 patients were treated with nedaplatin-based postoperative CCRT and 23 patients were treated with cisplatin-based postoperative CCRT. A total of 28 patients were treated with nedaplatin-based postoperative CCRT, and 49 patients were treated with cisplatin-based postoperative CCRT. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the treatment groups.

RESULTS

With postoperative CCRT, there were no significant differences in recurrence rate (P = 1.0000), PFS (log-rank: P = 0.8503), and OS (log-rank: P = 0.8926) between the two treatment groups. With primary CCRT, there were no significant differences in PFS (log-rank: P = 0.7845) and OS (log-rank: P = 0.3659). The frequency of acute toxicity was not significantly different between the cisplatin-based postoperative CCRT group and the nedaplatin-based postoperative CCRT group.

CONCLUSIONS

Nedaplatin-based postoperative CCRT is an effective and well-tolerated regimen for both early-stage and advanced-stage cervical cancer patients.

A Phase 1/2 Study of Definitive Chemoradiation Therapy Using Docetaxel, Nedaplatin, and 5-Fluorouracil (DNF-R) for Esophageal Cancer

PURPOSE

Patient survival in esophageal cancer (EC) remains poor. The purpose of this study was to investigate a regimen of definitive chemoradiation therapy (CRT) that exerts good local control of EC. We performed a phase 1/2 study to assess the safety and efficacy of CRT with docetaxel, nedaplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DNF-R).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible patients presented with stage IB to IV EC. Patients received 2 cycles of docetaxel (20, 30, or 40 mg/m(2)) and nedaplatin (50 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 and a continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)/day) on days 1 to 5 and 8 to 12, every 5 weeks, with concurrent radiation therapy (59.4 Gy/33 fractions). The recommended dose (RD) was determined using a 3 + 3 design.

RESULTS

In the phase 1 study, the dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. The RD of docetaxel was determined to be 20 mg/m(2). In the phase 2 study, grade 3 to 4 acute toxicities included neutropenia (42.8%), febrile neutropenia (7.14%), thrombocytopenia (17.9%), and esophagitis (21.4%). Grade 3 to 4 late radiation toxicity included esophagostenosis (10.7%). The complete response rate was 82.1% (95% confidence interval: 67.9-96.3%). Both the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 41.2 months.

CONCLUSIONS

DNF-R showed good tolerability and strong antitumor activity, suggesting that it is a potentially effective therapeutic regimen for EC.

Full costs of dispensing and administering fluorouracil chemotherapy for outpatients: A microcosting study

BACKGROUND

Although full costs (including direct and indirect costs) that incurred during the process of chemotherapy administration should be measured, many studies estimate only direct labor and medication costs associated with various chemotherapy delivery systems.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the total costs for dispensing and administration of fluorouracil when administered with leucovorin, by intravenous infusion or bolus, using a microcosting approach from the perspective of a provider or health system.

METHODS

A time-and-motion study was used to measure the time spent by (1) pharmacy staff in the handling, admixture, and dispensing of fluorouracil and (2) patients in the clinic. The study was performed at The Cancer Institute of New Jersey for an 8-month period. Costs of dispensing and administering fluorouracil were calculated per patient visit on the basis of resources used in the processing of fluorouracil and time spent by pharmacy staff and patient. All costs were standardized to 2005 dollars.

RESULTS

A total of 275 observations were made, and 74 (26.9%) of these were associated with fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Pharmacy staff spent an average of 11 minutes for bolus fluorouracil with leucovorin infusion (fluorouracil/LCV-IV) and 8 minutes for bolus fluorouracil with bolus leucovorin (fluorouracil/LCV-B). Patients who received fluorouracil/LCV-IV spent an average of 203 minutes in the clinic, whereas patients who received fluorouracil/LCV-B spent 110 minutes. The average cost of administering fluorouracil/LCV-IV was $933, which comprised drug costs ($279), dispensing costs ($189), and administration costs ($465). The average cost of fluorouracil/LCV-B was $474, which comprised drug costs ($65), dispensing costs ($141), and administration costs ($268).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to formally demonstrate the high cost of administering the injectable form of fluorouracil chemotherapy with leucovorin, despite relatively low drug acquisition cost. Therefore, reimbursement rates for fluorouracil should be calculated in such a way that covers all costs, including overhead costs for the department.

Nedaplatin: a radiosensitizing agent for patients with cervical cancer

Despite the recent advances in the management of cervical cancer using cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy, substantial treatment failure still occurs, especially in advanced-stage patients and early-stage cervical cancer patients with high-risk prognostic factors. Therefore, efforts to further improve the survival and quality of life of these patients are necessary. Nedaplatin (cis-diammine-glycoplatinum), a derivative of cisplatin, was developed with the aim of producing a treatment with a similar effectiveness to cisplatin but decreased renal and gastrointestinal toxicities. Based on the promising results of preclinical studies, the clinical efficacy of nedaplatin as a radiosensitizing agent was evaluated in patients with cervical cancer. Retrospective analysis of nedaplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) against cervical cancer suggested that nedaplatin-based CCRT can be considered as an alternative to cisplatin-based CCRT in both early-stage and advanced-stage cervical cancer patients. However, due to the lack of a randomized controlled study, nedaplatin-based CCRT has not been convincingly proven to be clinically effective in patients with cervical cancer. Further investigations in randomized controlled trials are therefore needed.

Therapy-related leukemia following chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer

Chemoradiotherapy has improved the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer. Although a sufficiently long-time survival has resulted in the increase of several treatment-related late toxicities, little is still known about the incidence of secondary malignancies. In our hospital, 348 patients with esophageal cancer received chemotherapy consisting of nedaplatin and 5-fluorouracil and concurrent irradiation. Median and average follow-up durations were 8 and 21 months (1-92), respectively. Four patients developed leukemia after 19-48 months of follow-up. Two patients were diagnosed with overt leukemia from myelodysplastic syndrome presenting a complex karyotype, including the deletion of chromosome 5 or 7. Notably, one patient showed an additional chromosomal abnormality with t(9;22)(q34;q11). Other patients developed acute myeloid leukemia with t(9;22)(q34;q11) and Burkitt leukemia with t(8;14)(q24;q32). All patients eventually succumbed to leukemia. Platinum and fluorouracil have shown relatively lower risks for secondary malignancies in comparison with alkylating agents and topoisomerase II inhibitors. Especially, nedaplatin has never been described to introduce secondary neoplasms. Our report supports the idea that the concurrent administration of radiotherapy with these agents affects the risk of leukemia. Interestingly, rare balanced chromosomal abnormalities were observed in the present cases, thus providing new insights into the leukemogenesis of therapy-related leukemia.

The safety and effectiveness of endoscopic and non-endoscopic approaches to the management of early esophageal cancer: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, management of early cancer (stages 0-IIA) has comprised esophagectomy, either alone or in combination with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. Recent efforts to improve outcomes and minimize side-effects have focussed on minimally invasive, endoscopic treatments that remove lesions while sparing healthy tissue. This review assesses their safety and efficacy/effectiveness relative to traditional, non-endoscopic treatments for early esophageal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies was performed using Cochrane guidelines. Bibliographic databases searched to identify relevant English language studies published in the last 3 years included: PubMed (i.e., MEDLINE and additional sources), EMBASE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, the UK Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (NHS EED, DARE and HTA) databases, EconLit and Web of Science. Web sites of professional associations, relevant cancer organizations, clinical practice guidelines, and clinical trials were also searched. Two independent reviewers selected, critically appraised, and extracted information from studies.

RESULTS

The review included 75 studies spanning 3124 patients and 10 forms of treatment. Most studies were of short term duration and non-comparative. Adverse events reported across studies of endoscopic techniques were similar and less significant compared to those in the studies of non-endoscopic techniques. Complete response rates were slightly lower for photodynamic therapy (PDT) relative to the other endoscopic techniques, possibly due to differences in patient populations across studies. No studies compared overall or cause-specific survival in patients who received endoscopic treatments vs. those who received non-endoscopic treatments.

DISCUSSION

Based on findings from this review, there is no single "best practice" approach to the treatment of early esophageal cancer.

Prospective study of daily low-dose nedaplatin and continuous 5-fluorouracil infusion combined with radiation for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Protracted low-dose concurrent chemotherapy combined with radiation has been proposed for enhanced treatment results for esophageal cancer. We evaluated the efficacy and the toxicity of a novel regimen of daily low-dose nedaplatin (cis-diammine-glycolatoplatinum) and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) with radiation in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Methods

Between January 2003 and June 2008, 33 patients with clinical stage I to IVB esophageal squamous cell carcinoma were enrolled. Nedaplatin (10 mg/body/day) was administered daily and 5-FU (500 mg/body/day) was administered continuously for 20 days. Fractionated radiotherapy for a total dose of 50.4-66 Gy was administered together with chemotherapy. Additional chemotherapy with nedaplatin and 5-FU was optionally performed for a maximum of 5 courses after chemoradiotherapy. The primary end-point of this study was to evaluate the tumor response, and the secondary end-points were to evaluate the toxicity and the overall survival.

Results

Twenty-two patients (72.7%) completed the regimen of chemoradiotherapy. Twenty patients (60.6%) achieved a complete response, 10 patients (30.3%) a partial response. One patient (3.0%) had a stable disease, and 2 (6.1%) a progressive disease. The overall response rate was 90.9% (95% confidence interval: 75.7%-98.1%). For grade 3-4 toxicity, leukopenia was observed in 75.8% of the cases, thrombocytopenia in 24.2%, anemia in 9.1%, and esophagitis in 36.4%, while late grade 3-4 cardiac toxicity occurred in 6.1%. Additional chemotherapy was performed for 26 patients (78.8%) and the median number of courses was 3 (range, 1-5). The 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates were 83.9%, 76.0% and 58.8%, respectively. The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 94.7% and 88.4% in patients with T1-3 M0 disease, and 66.2% and 55.2% in patients with T4/M1 disease.

Conclusion

The treatment used in our study may yield a high complete response rate and better survival for each stage of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00197444