Results of EORTC phase III trial 22931 comparing, postoperatively, radiotherapy (RT) to concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (RT-CT) with high dose cisplatin in locally advanced head and neck (H&N) carcinomas (SCC)

Interventions for the treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer: chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are the most common cancers arising in the head and neck. Treatment of oral cavity cancer is generally surgery followed by radiotherapy, whereas oropharyngeal cancers, which are more likely to be advanced at the time of diagnosis, are managed with radiotherapy or chemoradiation. Surgery for oral cancers can be disfiguring and both surgery and radiotherapy have significant functional side effects. The development of new chemotherapy agents, new combinations of agents and changes in the relative timing of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy treatments may potentially bring about increases in both survival and quality of life for this group of patients. This review updates one last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma results in improved overall survival, improved disease-free survival and/or improved locoregional control, when incorporated as either induction therapy given prior to locoregional treatment (i.e. radiotherapy or surgery), concurrent with radiotherapy or in the adjuvant (i.e. after locoregional treatment with radiotherapy or surgery) setting.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched 4 bibliographic databases up to 15 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and that evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, we assessed the new included trials for their risk of bias and at least two authors extracted data from them. Our primary outcome was overall survival (time to death from any cause). Secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (time to disease recurrence or death from any cause) and locoregional control (response to primary treatment). We contacted trial authors for additional information or clarification when necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 100 studies with 18,813 participants. None of the included trials were at low risk of bias.  For induction chemotherapy, we reported the results for contemporary regimens that will be of interest to clinicians and people being treated for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to clearly demonstrate a survival benefit from induction chemotherapy with platinum plus 5-fluorouracil prior to radiotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) for death 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.04, P = 0.11; 7427 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), prior to surgery (HR for death 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.60, P = 0.77; 198 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence) or prior to concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) with cisplatin (HR for death 0.71, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.35, P = 0.30; 389 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to support the use of an induction chemotherapy regimen with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil plus docetaxel prior to CRT with cisplatin (HR for death 1.08, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.44, P = 0.63; 760 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence).  There is insufficient evidence to support the use of adjuvant chemotherapy over observation only following surgery (HR for death 0.95, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.22, P = 0.67; 353 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Among studies that compared post-surgical adjuvant CRT, as compared to post-surgical RT, adjuvant CRT showed a survival benefit (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98, P = 0.03; 1097 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Primary treatment with CRT, as compared to radiotherapy alone,  was associated with a reduction in the risk of death (HR for death 0.74, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83, P < 0.00001; 2852 participants, 24 studies; moderate-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review demonstrate that chemotherapy in the curative-intent treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers only seems to be of benefit when used in specific circumstances together with locoregional treatment. The  evidence does not show a clear survival benefit from the use of induction chemotherapy prior to radiotherapy, surgery or CRT. Adjuvant CRT reduces the risk of death by 16%, as compared to radiotherapy alone. Concurrent chemoradiation as compared to radiation alone is associated with a greater than 20% improvement in overall survival; however, additional research is required to inform how the specific chemotherapy regimen may influence this benefit.

Interventions for the treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer: chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are frequently described as part of a group of oral cancers or head and neck cancer. Treatment of oral cavity cancer is generally surgery followed by radiotherapy, whereas oropharyngeal cancers, which are more likely to be advanced at the time of diagnosis, are managed with radiotherapy or chemoradiation. Surgery for oral cancers can be disfiguring and both surgery and radiotherapy have significant functional side effects, notably impaired ability to eat, drink and talk. The development of new chemotherapy agents, new combinations of agents and changes in the relative timing of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy treatments may potentially bring about increases in both survival and quality of life for this group of patients.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer results in improved survival, disease free survival, progression free survival, locoregional control and reduced recurrence of disease. To determine which regimen and time of administration (induction, concomitant or adjuvant) is associated with better outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED were undertaken on 1st December 2010. Reference lists of recent reviews and included studies were also searched to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and which compared the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration, were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eighty-nine trials which met the inclusion criteria were assessed for risk of bias and data were extracted by two or more review authors. The primary outcome was total mortality. Trial authors were contacted for additional information or for clarification.

MAIN RESULTS

There is evidence of a small increase in overall survival associated with induction chemotherapy compared to locoregional treatment alone (25 trials), hazard ratio (HR) of mortality 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.00, P = 0.06). Post-surgery adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved overall survival compared to surgery ± radiotherapy alone (10 trials), HR of mortality 0.88 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, P = 0.03), and there is some evidence that this improvement may be greater with concomitant adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (4 trials), HR of mortality 0.84 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.98, P = 0.03). In patients with unresectable tumours, there is evidence that concomitant or alternating chemoradiotherapy is associated with improved survival compared to radiotherapy alone (26 trials), HR of mortality 0.78 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.83, P < 0.00001). These findings are confirmed by sensitivity analyses based on studies assessed at low risk of bias. There is insufficient evidence to identify which agent(s) and/or regimen(s) are the most effective. The additional toxicity attributable to chemotherapy in the combined regimens remains unquantified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and surgery, is associated with improved overall survival in patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Induction chemotherapy may prolong survival by 8 to 20% and adjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy may prolong survival by up to 16%. In patients with unresectable tumours, concomitant or alternating chemoradiotherapy may prolong survival by 10 to 22%. There is insufficient evidence as to which agent or regimen is most effective and the additional toxicity associated with chemotherapy given in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery cannot be quantified.

Interventions for the treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer: chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are frequently described as part of a group of oral cancers or head and neck cancer. Treatment of oral cavity cancer is generally surgery followed by radiotherapy, whereas oropharyngeal cancers, which are more likely to be advanced at the time of diagnosis, are managed with radiotherapy or chemoradiation. Surgery for oral cancers can be disfiguring and both surgery and radiotherapy have significant functional side effects, notably impaired ability to eat, drink and talk. The development of new chemotherapy agents, new combinations of agents and changes in the relative timing of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy treatments may potentially bring about increases in both survival and quality of life for this group of patients.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer results in improved survival, disease free survival, progression free survival, locoregional control and reduced recurrence of disease. To determine which regimen and time of administration (induction, concomitant or adjuvant) is associated with better outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED were undertaken on 28th July 2010. Reference lists of recent reviews and included studies were also searched to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and which compared the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration, were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials which met the inclusion criteria were assessed for risk of bias using six domains: sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, completeness of outcome data, selective reporting and other possible sources of bias. Data were extracted using a specially designed form and entered into the characteristics of included studies table and the analysis sections of the review. The proportion of participants in each trial with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are recorded in Additional Table 1.

MAIN RESULTS

There was no statistically significant improvement in overall survival associated with induction chemotherapy compared to locoregional treatment alone in 25 trials (hazard ratio (HR) of mortality 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.00). Post-surgery adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival compared to surgery +/- radiotherapy alone in 10 trials (HR of mortality 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99), and there was an additional benefit of adjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy compared to radiotherapy in 4 of these trials (HR of mortality 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98). Concomitant chemoradiotherapy resulted in improved survival compared to radiotherapy alone in patients whose tumours were considered unresectable in 25 trials (HR of mortality 0.79, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.84). However, the additional toxicity attributable to chemotherapy in the combined regimens remains unquantified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and surgery, is associated with improved overall survival in patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Induction chemotherapy is associated with a 9% increase in survival and adjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy is associated with a 16% increase in overall survival following surgery. In patients with unresectable tumours, concomitant chemoradiotherapy showed a 22% benefit in overall survival compared with radiotherapy alone.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with cyclophosphamide, pirarubicin, and cisplatin for patients with locally advanced salivary gland carcinoma

CONCLUSION

This concurrent chemoradiotherapy with CPA, THP, and CDDP showed major antitumor activity with manageable toxicity as treatment of advanced salivary gland carcinoma patients. The high response rate (RR) justifies further evaluation of this chemoradiotherapy combination.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a concurrent chemoradiotherapy using cyclophosphamide (CPA), pirarubicin (THP), and cisplatin (CDDP) in patients with locally advanced salivary gland carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventeen patients with previously untreated stage III-IV salivary gland carcinoma were entered in this trial between January 2000 and September 2005. Chemotherapy consisted of CPA 400 mg/m2 on day 1, THP 40 mg/m2 by 6-h infusion on day 1, and CDDP 60 mg/m2 by 2-h infusion on day 1. Radiotherapy (2.0 Gy/fraction/day, mean total dose: 67.2 Gy (64.0-72.0 Gy)) administered 5 days per week, was targeted to begin on day 1.

RESULTS

The RR was 76% (13/17) and the pathological complete response (CR) was 24% (4/17). The primary site CR was 29% (5/17) and metastatic lymph node CR was 33% (4/12). The 5-year survival rate was 70%. Neutropenia, leukocytopenia and mucositis were common adverse effects, but all 17 patients were assessable for toxicity.

Cervical lymph node metastases of squamous cell carcinoma from an unknown primary

Cervical lymph node metastases of squamous cell carcinoma from occult primary constitute about 2-5% of all patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUP). Metastases in the upper and middle neck are generally attributed to head and neck cancers, whereas the lower neck (supraclavicular area) involvement is often associated with primary malignancies below the clavicles. The diagnostic procedures include physical examination with thorough evaluation of the head and neck mucosa using fiber-optic endoscopy, biopsies from all suspicious sites or blindly from the sites of possible origin of the primary, computer tomography and/or magnetic resonance. A systematic tonsillectomy in the absence of suspicious lesions is often recommended since up to 25% of primary tumors can be detected in this site. The thoracic primary (tracheal, bronchial, lung, esophagus) has to be excluded, especially in the case of lower neck involvement. Positron emission tomography (PET) with fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose allows detection of primary tumor in about 25% of cases, but this procedure is still considered investigational. Therapeutic approaches include surgery (lymph node excision or neck dissection), with or without postoperative radiotherapy, radiotherapy alone and radiotherapy followed by surgery. In early stages (N1), neck dissection and radiotherapy seem to have similar efficacy, whereas more advanced cases (N2, N3) necessitate combined approaches. The extent of radiotherapy (irradiation of bilateral neck and mucosa versus ipsilateral neck radiotherapy) remains debatable. A potential benefit from extensive radiotherapy should be weighted against its acute and late morbidity and difficulties in re-irradiation in the case of subsequent primary emergence. The role of other methods, such as chemotherapy and hyperthermia, remains to be determined.

Postoperative concomitant irradiation and chemotherapy with mitomycin C and bleomycin for advanced head-and-neck carcinoma

PURPOSE

In a prospective randomized clinical study, simultaneous postoperative application of irradiation (RT), mitomycin C, and bleomycin was tested in a group of patients with operable advanced head-and-neck carcinoma. It was expected that the planned combined postoperative therapy would reduce the number of locoregional recurrences and prolong survival.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 114 eligible patients with Stage III or IV squamous cell head-and-neck carcinoma were randomized to receive postoperative RT alone (Group 1) or RT combined with simultaneous mitomycin C and bleomycin (Group 2). Patients were stratified according to the stage and site of the primary tumor and the presence or absence of high-risk prognostic factors. Primary surgical treatment was performed with curative intent in all patients. Patients in both groups were postoperatively irradiated to the total dose of 56-70 Gy. Chemotherapy included mitomycin C 15 mg/m(2) after 10 Gy and 5 mg of bleomycin twice a week during RT to the planned total dose of 70 mg.

RESULTS

At 2 years, patients in the radiochemotherapy group had better locoregional control (86%) than those in the RT alone group (69%; p = 0.037). Disease-free survival and overall survival was also better in the radiochemotherapy group compared with the RT-alone group (76% vs. 60%, p = 0.099; and 74% vs. 64%, p = 0.036, respectively). Patients who benefited from chemotherapy were those with high-risk factors.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study indicate that concomitant postoperative radiochemotherapy with mitomycin C and bleomycin improves locoregional control and survival in patients with advanced head-and-neck carcinoma. The patients who benefited from chemotherapy were those with high-risk factors.

EORTC Radiotherapy Group: achievements and future projects. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Radiotherapy (RT) Group will celebrate 27 years of activity in 2002. During its long history, the Radiotherapy Group has conducted a large number of studies which have provided valuable information on the radiation treatment of several disease sites. Group efforts have been concentrated on dose-effect studies, optimal fractionation schemes, combinations with other treatment modalities, and new radiotherapy techniques. The EORTC RT Group was the first in Europe to develop and introduce methodologies of Quality Assurance in radiotherapy. The RT Group actively collaborates with other EORTC Groups and international organisations. Currently, several phase III studies are being conducted in collaboration with European, North American and Australian organisations. The collaboration with RTOG led to the setting up of common systems for scoring late normal tissue effects. In the years to come, the Group will keep pioneering pivotal trials in radiotherapy and radio-chemotherapy. It will also explore combinations with novel therapies in phase I trials and implement innovative translational research programmes.

The combined use of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in the treatment of solid tumours

Several clinical trials carried out during the last decade clearly show that concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy significantly improves local control in a variety of advanced solid tumours. In most of these trials, cisplatin alone or in combination with other drugs has been used. This has led to improved survival rates in head and neck, lung and cervical cancer. The interaction of radiotherapy with chemotherapy for these solid tumours appears to be schedule-dependent, as no such an improvement was observed with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy in eight out of nine clinical trials in cervical cancer. A major advantage of this combined modality treatment is organ preservation possible for patients with advanced larynx or anal cancer. Major further improvement can be expected from the design and exploration of drugs that influence the pathways leading to cell death after irradiation. Examples include topoisomerase 1 (topo1) inhibitors, alkyl-lysophospholipids, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) receptor inhibitors.