Induction VBM plus radiotherapy, versus radiotherapy alone for advanced head and neck cancer: long-term results

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searched 4 bibliographic databases up to 15 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.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

Concurrent Chemotherapy with Carboplatin + 5-Fluorouracil and Radiotherapy in Advanced Squamous Cell Head and Neck Carcinoma: A Retrospective Single Institution's Study

Aims and backround

The purpose of the study was to analyze the long-term follow-up of a single institution's experience with a regimen of concomitant carboplatin + 5-fluorouracil (CBDCA + 5-FU) infusion and radiotherapy.

Study design

Fifty-eight patients with locally advanced squamous cell head and neck cancer treated with combined chemoradiotherapy between March 1990 and October 1998 were reviewed retrospectively. According to the TNM tumor staging, 6 patients had stage II, 21 stage III and 31 stage IV tumors. The chemotherapy regimen consisted of the combination of 5-FU and CBDCA, for a total of 3 cycles. Both drugs were given as 4-day continuous intravenous infusions during the first and fourth week of radiation therapy: 5-FU at 1000 mg/m2 per day and CBDCA at 75 mg/m2 per day. Radiation was given in single daily fractions of 1.8 to 2 Gy, to a total dose of 66 to 70 Gy.

Results

After the completion of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, 34 patients (58.6%) achieved clinical and radiological (computerized tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging) complete remission, 15 patients (25.9%) partial remission >50%, 5 patients (8.6%) partial remission >50%, and 4 patients (6.8%) had no response. Toxicity was intensive but tolerable. After a median follow-up of 25 months, overall survival and recurrence-free survival estimated for the whole patient population was 52% at 3 years, and the median length of recurrence-free survival was 23 months.

Conclusions

Our regimen combining standard single daily fraction radiation with the conventional dose of CBDCA and 5-FU was given without dose modification regardless of the severity of the adverse effects. It gave a clinical complete response at the primary site in 58.6% of patients. With a 52% projected 3-year overall survival, our series compares favorably with similar studies in the literature. Therefore, our results with concomitant CBDCA/5-FU infusion and radiotherapy are encouraging and suggest that CBDCA can be substituted for cisplatin with a good therapeutic index.

A network meta-analysis of the sequencing and types of systemic therapies with definitive radiotherapy in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN)☆

OBJECTIVES

The current standard therapy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN) is platinum-based chemotherapy plus concurrent radiotherapy (CRT), but several systemic therapies have been evaluated. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) with random effects to enable direct and indirect comparisons of all existing treatment modalities for LASCCHN simultaneously.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, ASCO abstracts, ASTRO abstracts and the Cochrane Central of Registered Trials using Cochrane methodology to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to June 2016. Only abstracts that involved the same definitive radiotherapy in the arms for the RCT were included.

RESULTS

Sixty-five RCTs involving 13,574 patients and 16 different treatment strategies were identified. Chemotherapy plus concurrent radiation (CRT) was superior to RT with a HR of 0.74 (95%CR 0.69-0.79) for OS in the NMA. Only 3 trials compared RT alone to concurrent therapy with an EGFR antibody (ERT), demonstrating a superior OS (HR 0.75, 95% CR 0.60-0.94), but this difference was not statistically significant when interpreted in a NMA (HR 0.84, 95%CR 0.65-1.08). ERT was not superior to CRT (HR 1.19, 95%CR 0.93-1.54), and the addition of neo-adjuvant taxane-based chemotherapy to CRT was not beneficial (HR 0.86, 95% CR 0.70-1.07).

CONCLUSION

The addition of either adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy to the CRT backbone does not confer an OS benefit in the treatment of LASCCHN. Similarly, ERT does not confer an OS benefit for patients who are eligible for CRT.

Induction chemotherapy decreases the rate of distant metastasis in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma but does not improve survival or locoregional control: a meta-analysis

The definitive effect of induction chemotherapy (IC) on locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) remains uncertain and although randomized controlled trials are supposed to provide high levels evidence for clinical guidelines, the data thus far has been conflicted. In an effort to elucidate the potential benefit of IC, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (1965-2011) was performed investigating the impact of IC on survival, locoregional control, distant metastasis, and toxicity in HNSCC. Kaplan-Meier curves were read by a digitizing software-Engauge Digitizer. Data combination was performed using the software-RevMan and trial level log hazard ratio (HR) and variance were pooled and presented. Among the 40 eligible trials, 28 trials encompassing 4189 patients receiving locoregional treatment with or without IC were included in the analysis. The cumulative benefit of IC on overall survival and distant metastasis was 6% (HR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.87-1.01, P = 0.11) and 7% (95%CI = 0-13%, P = 0.05) respectively while for locoregional control a benefit was not observed as seen by the -2% (95%CI = -11% to 8%, P = 0.73) improved control rate. In a subsite analysis specifically for laryngeal preservation, IC did not significantly improve survival (P = 0.47). There was a significant benefit from the cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF) protocols with an increase in overall survival of 13% (HR = 0.87, 95%CI = 0.78-0.97, P = 0.01), and a reduction in the 5-year distant metastasis rate of 11% (95%CI = 0-21%, P = 0.04). The occurrence of grade 3/4 mucositis, leukopenia and emesis was significantly lower in patients receiving IC compared to patients receiving concomitant chemoradiotherapy. In conclusion, there is not a significant benefit of the pooled IC regimens in HNSCC on survival or locoregional control. In contrast, IC does show significant benefit in the reduction of distant metastasis. When protocols using a PF regimen are analyzed independently, a significant improvement in survival and rate of distant metastases is observed while there is not a benefit in locoregional control. The routine use of IC is still debatable. IC could be applied on larynx preservation strategy.

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.

An overview of randomised controlled trials of adjuvant chemotherapy in head and neck cancer

Meta-analysis of the published results from 54 randomised controlled trials of adjuvant chemotherapy in head and neck cancer suggests that chemotherapy might increase absolute survival by 6.5% (95% confidence interval 3.1-9.9%). The odds ratio in favour of chemotherapy is 1.37 (95% confidence interval 1.24-1.5). Single-agent chemotherapy given synchronously with radiotherapy increased survival by 12.1% (95% confidence interval 5-19%). The benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy was less: a rate difference of 3.7% (95% confidence interval 0.9-6.5%). The results suggest that the investigation of optimal agents and scheduling for synchronous radiotherapy and chemotherapy might still be important in clinical trials in head and neck cancer.

Evidence-based recommendations against neoadjuvant chemotherapy for routine management of patients with squamous cell head and neck cancer

The objective of this study was to determine appropriate recommendations for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC). Published reports of randomized trials of neoadjuvant versus standard therapy in patients with stage III and stage IV HNC were identified by literature search. The overall trial results were analyzed using three pooling techniques: vote count, weighted median survival, and meta-analysis of published survival data. Excluded from analysis were articles on intra-arterial therapy, studies without a standard treatment control arm, studies that included adjuvant therapy, and abstracts. Twelve studies were evaluable for vote count, 11 for weighted median survival analysis, and 10 for quantitative meta-analysis. By vote count there was no observed survival difference in 7 trials, a trend favoring control in 3, a statistically significant difference favoring control in 1, and a trend favoring neoadjuvant therapy in 1. The weighted median survival was 20.9 months for control versus 20.0 months for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with consistent trends for resectable and nonresectable disease and for chemotherapy combinations versus single agents. The common odds ratios for deaths at 12, 24, and 36 months were 1.12, 1.27, and 1.11, respectively, all in favor of control treatment. Data generated using rigorous methodological standards indicate that neoadjuvant chemotherapy should not be offered to patients with locally advanced HNC if improved survival is the outcome of interest. It is premature to recommend neoadjuvant chemotherapy to preserve organ function, although patients should be aware of this option and the limitations of the current data.