Meta-analysis of induction chemotherapy as a selection marker for chemoradiation in the head and neck

OBJECTIVE

Many trials incorporate induction chemotherapy (IC) in selecting for organ preservation in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). However, few studies examine IC response in predicting for chemoradiation therapy (CRT) response. This meta-analysis aims to determine the predictive accuracy of IC for subsequent response to CRT and overall survival (OS).

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane register.

METHODS

A systematic search identified studies from database inception to October 2016 that used IC prior to CRT as definitive treatment for advanced HNSCC. The sensitivities and specificities of IC response predicting for complete CRT response were calculated, and the results were pooled in a summary receiver operating curve. One-, 2- and 5-year OS data were extracted.

RESULTS

Seven studies (n = 423 patients) were analyzed for response and six (n = 439) for OS. Pooled median sensitivity and specificity of IC response predicting CRT response were 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.98) and 0.43 (95% CI: 0.00-0.61), respectively. Patients were more likely to respond to CRT given previous response to IC (positive likelihood ratio = 1.6; 95% CI: 1.21-2.11) and less likely to respond to CRT if they failed to respond to IC (negative likelihood ratio = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.07-0.38). At 2 years, good response to IC was a statistically significant prognostic marker with a risk ratio of 1.35 (95% CI: 1.12-1.64).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggests that patients with poor IC response will have poorer response to CRT and should be directed to other modalities. In contrast, good IC response does not guarantee a favorable outcome to CRT; however, because these patients are likely to have better prognoses, they should be offered salvage therapies of curative intent despite treatment failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA. Laryngoscope, 128:1594-1601, 2018.

Modified weekly cisplatin-based chemotherapy is acceptable in postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Triweekly cisplatin-based postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) has high intolerance and toxicities in locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC). We evaluated the effect of a modified weekly cisplatin-based chemotherapy in postoperative CCRT.

METHODS

A total of 117 patients with LAHNC were enrolled between December 2007 and December 2012. Survival, compliance/adverse events, and independent prognostic factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

Median follow-up time was 30.0 (3.1-73.0) months. Most patients completed the entire course of postoperative CCRT (radiotherapy ≥ 60 Gy, 94.9%; ≥ 6 times weekly chemotherapy, 75.2%). Only 17.1% patients required hospital admission. The most common adverse effect was grade 3/4 mucositis (28.2%). No patient died due to protocol-related adverse effects. Multivariate analysis revealed the following independent prognostic factors: oropharyngeal cancer, extracapsular spread, and total radiation dose. Two-year progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 70.9% and 79.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Modified weekly cisplatin-based chemotherapy is an acceptable regimen in postoperative CCRT for LAHNC.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (sequential approach) in the management of head and neck cancer

Concurrent chemoradiation is considered the standard-of-care for locally advanced head and neck cancer of the hypopharynx, oropharynx and larynx, as well as unresectable disease. This paradigm was challenged by the introduction of induction chemotherapy (IC), which demonstrated non-inferiority in regards of overall survival (OS), along with increased organ preservation, when compared to the surgery and radiotherapy. More recently, IC followed by concurrent chemoradiation, the so-called sequential approach was developed in an attempt to decrease metastatic spread and improve locoregional control (LRC) rates, with much controversy amongst experts. A careful evaluation by a multidisciplinary team is necessary to recognize which patients should be offered this therapeutic approach due to a significantly greater rate of toxicity. Herein, we analyze the most current available evidence regarding the use of sequential therapy versus concurrent chemoradiation. Different factors including toxicity profile, adherence and patient characteristics play a major role in choosing the most appropriate treatment regimen.