An elective radiation dose of 46 Gy is feasible in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated by intensity-modulated radiotherapy: A long-term follow-up result

Contemporary management of the neck in nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Up to 85% of the patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma present with regional nodal metastasis. Although excellent nodal control is achieved with radiotherapy, a thorough understanding of the current TNM staging criteria and pattern of nodal spread is essential to optimize target delineation and minimize unnecessary irradiation to adjacent normal tissue. Selective nodal irradiation with sparing of the lower neck and submandibular region according to individual nodal risk is now emerging as the preferred treatment option. There has also been continual refinement in staging classification by incorporating relevant adverse nodal features. As for the uncommon occurrence of recurrent nodal metastasis after radiotherapy, surgery remains the standard of care.

Simultaneous Reduction of Volume and Dose in Clinical Target Volume for Nasopharyngeal Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

To compare the treatment outcome and severe late adverse effects (AEs) between conventional volume and dose (CVD) and simultaneously reduced volume and dose (SRVD) of clinical target volume treatments in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This retrospective cohort study enrolled patients with nonmetastatic stage II to IV nasopharyngeal cancer from a single institute. Survival endpoints and severe (≥grade 3) late AEs and comorbidity were compared between groups. The correlation of severe late AEs, comorbidity, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to June 2017, this study enrolled 178 patients, 64 in the CVD group and 114 in the SRVD group. The 2 groups did not differ significantly in patient characteristics except for mean follow-up time (37.6 vs 48.8 months; P = .01). The SRVD group did not significantly differ from the CVD group in local control survival (82.0% vs 78.4%; P = .85), regional control survival (89.9% vs 86.0%; P = .62), or disease-free survival (76.4% vs 66.9%; P = .67). The SRVD group had significantly better OS (93.9% vs 67.0%; P < .001) and salvage survival (79.3% vs 20.7%; P < .01) and a significantly lower ratio of severe lung infection (1 of 113 vs 5 of 59; P = .02). The SRVD group had a significantly lower risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.3; P = .03). The factors associated with a significantly higher risk of mortality were N3 (regional lymph node stage status of N3) (HR, 3.0; P = .02); comorbidities of diabetes, coronary artery disease, or chronic kidney disease (grades 2-3) (HR, 3.8; P = .009), and severe lung infection (HR, 6.3; P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneously reduced volume and dose of clinical target volumes did not impair locoregional control or disease-free survival. The benefits of SRVD treatment may include significant reduction in severe late AEs, particularly lung infection, dysphagia, and xerostomia. However, additional studies with longer patient follow-up are required to confirm these benefits.

Lymph node-to-primary tumor standardized uptake value ratio on PET predicts distant metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prognostic value of the relative maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) ratio between neck lymph node and primary tumor (NTR) measured by pretreatment ¹⁸F-FDG PET in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with non-disseminated NPC who underwent PET scans before radical intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to identify the optimal cut-off value for NTR. The prognostic value of NTR for distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method for survival analyses and Cox regression for multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 437 eligible patients, the median follow-up time was 62.9 (range, 2.1-113.0) months. Patients with high NTR (NTR > 0.9181) experienced significantly worse DMFS (5-year 80.5% vs. 91.6%, P < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, we found that patients with high NTR had significantly lower DMFS in T1-2 category (5-year 86.1% vs. 98.1%, P = 0.002), T3-4 category (5-year 71.5% vs. 86.2%, P = 0.010), N2-3 category (5-year 75.3% vs. 86.2%, P = 0.048), and stage IVA-B (5-year 69.8% vs. 85.4%, P = 0.012). Multivariable analysis showed that NTR was an independent prognostic factor for DMFS (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.20-4.03, P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Pretreatment NTR is an easily accessible but potential prognosticator for DMFS in NPC patients treated by IMRT, which may help in providing more personalized treatment or designing future clinical trials.

The Prognostic Value of Albumin-to-Alkaline Phosphatase Ratio before Radical Radiotherapy in Patients with Non-metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Purpose

We first analyzed the prognostic power of albumin-to-alkaline phosphatase ratio (AAPR) before radical radiotherapy (RT) in non-metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients.

Materials and Methods

The records of 170 patients with biopsy-proven, non-metastatic NPC treated by radical RT between 1998 and 2016 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Median follow-up duration was 50.6 months. All patients received intensity-modulated RT and cisplatin based chemotherapy before, during, or after RT. The major treatment of patients was based on concurrent chemoradiotherapy (92.4%). The AAPR was calculated by the last value of both albumin and alkaline phosphatase within 1 month immediately preceding RT. The optimal cut-off level of AAPR was determined by using Cutoff Finder, a web-based system. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed.

Results

The optimal cut-off level of AAPR was 0.4876. After PSM analysis of whole cohort, an AAPR was not related to survival outcomes. In PSM analysis for patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC), an AAPR ≥ 0.4876 was related to better overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and locoregional relapse–free survival (LRRFS) (OS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.341; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.144 to 0.805; p=0.014; PFS: HR, 0.416; 95% CI, 0.189 to 0.914; p=0.029; and LRRFS: HR, 0.243; 95% CI, 0.077 to 0.769; p=0.016, respectively).

Conclusion

The AAPR, inexpensive and readily derived from a routine blood test, could be an independent prognostic factor for patients with LA-NPC. And it might help physicians determine treatment plans by identifying the patient's current status. Future prospective clinical trials to validate its prognostic value are needed.