Pretreatment age and serum lactate dehydrogenase as predictors of synchronous second primary cancer in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Uncommon Presentations of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Report of Two Cases

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), a rare form of squamous cell carcinoma originating from the nasopharynx epithelium, exhibits a higher prevalence in southern China, Southeast Asia, the Arctic, North Africa, and the Middle East, with significant incidence in northeastern India, particularly Nagaland. Commonly presenting with nasal and otological symptoms, NPC diagnosis is challenging due to its diverse clinical manifestations. This case report highlights two atypical NPC cases: a 32-year-old female presenting with chronic headache and giddiness and a 22-year-old male with severe right-sided facial pain and trismus. Both cases underwent extensive diagnostic procedures, including imaging and biopsies, ultimately confirming NPC. Treatment involved radiotherapy and chemotherapy, resulting in significant symptom improvement. These cases underscore the importance of recognizing unusual NPC presentations to facilitate early diagnosis and treatment, improving patient outcomes.

Optimized Nomogram for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Prognosis Prediction in Younger Patients (Aged 18-59): Development and Validation

PURPOSE

To develop a nomogram model for the predicted overall survival (OS) in patients aged 18 to 59 years with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and assess the value of the clinical application.

METHODS

In total, 1334 registers of NPC patients from 2010 to 2015 were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Univariate and multivariate Cox analysis were used to screen out independent risk factors affecting patients. Cox analysis predicted OS for patients with NPC at 3, 5, and 8 years. Nomogram performance was validated using the concordance index (C-index), receiver operating characteristic, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS

Age, sex, race, marital, histological type, tumor size, AJCC stage, and radiotherapy were independent risk factors. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-0.71] for the training set, and the C-index of the AJCC stage was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.62-0.65), both statistically significant (P < .01). The area under the curve for the nomogram at these intervals (0.755, 0.729, and 0.729, respectively) was higher than that of the AJCC stage (0.667, 0.646, and 0.646, respectively), indicating better predictive accuracy. The calibration curves revealed a high degree of agreement between the observation and the prediction. Compared to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, DCA showed better clinical utility.

CONCLUSION

The nomogram as novel predictor for nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients' survival.

Development and prospective validation of a risk score model in guiding individualized concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage II nasopharyngeal carcinoma in intensity-modulated radiotherapy era

Purpose

We aimed to develop and prospectively validate a risk score model to guide individualized concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for patients with stage II nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) in intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) era.

Materials and Methods

In total, 1220 patients who received CCRT or IMRT alone were enrolled in this study, including a training cohort (n = 719), a validation cohort (n = 307), and a prospective test cohort (n = 194). Patients were stratified into different risk groups by a risk score model based on independent prognostic factors, which were developed in the training cohort. Survival rates were compared by the log‐rank test. The validation and prospective test cohorts were used for validation.

Results

Total tumor volume, Epstein–Barr virus DNA, and lactate dehydrogenase were independent risk factors for failure‐free survival (FFS, all p < 0.05). A risk score model based on these three risk factors was developed to classify patients into low‐risk group (no risk factor, n = 337) and high‐risk group (one or more factors, n = 382) in the training cohort. In the high‐risk group, CCRT had better survival rates than IMRT alone (5‐year FFS: 82.6% vs. 74.0%, p = 0.028). However, there was no survival difference between CCRT and IMRT alone either in the whole training cohort (p = 0.15) or in the low‐risk group (p = 0.15). The results were verified in the validation and prospective test cohorts.

Conclusion

A risk score model was developed and prospectively validated to precisely select high‐risk stage II NPC patients who can benefit from CCRT, and thus guided individualized treatment in IMRT era.