Cisplatin, raltitrexed, levofolinic acid and 5-fluorouracil in locally advanced or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a phase II randomized study

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searched 4 bibliographic databases up to 15 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.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

Raltitrexed versus 5-fluorouracil with cisplatin and concurrent radiotherapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: An open labeled, randomized, controlled, and multicenter clinical trial

Background

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of raltitrexed (Saiweijian^®) plus cisplatin (SP regimen) and 5‐fluorouracil plus cisplatin (FP regimen) as concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA‐NPC).

Methods

Eligible patients (N = 135) were allocated randomly in a ratio of 1:1 to receive CCRT with either SP or FP. At least 2 cycles of chemotherapy was administrated during radiotherapy. Progression free survival (PFS) was primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), loco‐regional relapse free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) and toxicity.

Results

In this study, 68 patients received SP as CCRT, and 67 received FP. Objective responses were noted in 97.1% of the patients in the SP group and in 97.0% of the patients in the FP group (P = 1.00). At the end of a median 36 months follow‐up period, the estimated 3‐year PFS rates were 70.1% for SP and 66.6% for FP, respectively. The 3‐year LRRFS, DMFS and OS rates were 88.9%, 74.7% and 84.0%, respectively, for the SP group, and 92.3%, 71.0% and 73.7%, respectively, for the FP group. Overall, there was no difference between treatment groups with regard to response or survival. The most frequent acute toxicities monitored in both groups were bone marrow suppression, gastrointestinal side effects and oral mucositis (OM). The overall incidence of grade 3‐4 OM in the FP group (47.8%) was higher than in the SP group (11.8%). However, the incidence of other adverse effects observed in both groups was similar (P > .05).

Conclusions

These data indicate that SP and FP therapies have similar efficacy in treating LA‐NPC. The SP regimen showed a tolerable safety profile along with a lower frequency of severe OM and therefore, an improved life quality. In conclusion, SP was a well tolerated, effective, regimen for LA‐NPC treatment.

Effect of induction chemotherapy on the quality-of-life in patients with advanced stage tongue cancer by a prospective study

Objective

To assess how induction chemotherapy affects the quality-of-life (QoL) in patients with advanced tongue cancer.

Methods

This prospective study included patients who were diagnosed with advanced tongue cancer. Each patient was asked to complete the University of Washington QoL (UW-QoL), version 4, questionnaire preoperatively and at 12 months after surgery. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether or not they received induction chemotherapy.

Results

Of the 192 patients included in the analysis, 145 patients had received induction chemotherapy. There were no significant differences regarding age, sex, tumour stage, node stage, flap reconstruction, tumour resection range and radiotherapy between the two groups. The mean total hospital cost was significantly higher in patients who underwent induction chemotherapy compared with those who did not (68 000 versus 44 000 Yuan Renminbi, respectively). The two groups had similar pre-treatment and post-treatment composite QoL scores and in the 12 individual domains.

Conclusion

Induction chemotherapy had a limited effect on postoperative QoL in patients with advanced tongue cancers, but it cost significantly more to administer.

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.

Phase II trial of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (Zolinza, suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid, SAHA) in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer

This phase II trial was initiated to assess the efficacy and safety of oral vorinostat (Zolinza, suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid, SAHA) in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer. Eligible patients must have recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer unresponsive to or intolerant of conventional chemotherapy. Patients must have measurable disease, adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function, and be able to swallow capsules. Four or more weeks must have elapsed since prior chemotherapy, radiation therapy, major surgery or investigational anticancer therapy, and patients must have recovered from prior toxicities. Study endpoints included response rate, duration of stable disease and progression-free survival. Thirteen patients were enrolled (9 males); 1 withdrew consent prior to starting therapy. Twelve patients received oral vorinostat 400 mg once daily and were evaluable for response. The median age was 54 years (range 40-82). All patients had received prior chemotherapy (including 10 with platinum- or taxane-based combination therapy), and 9 had prior radiation therapy. No confirmed partial or complete responses were observed. One unconfirmed partial response was seen. Three patients had stable disease ranging from 9 to 26 weeks. Nine patients discontinued due to progressive disease, two withdrew consent, and one discontinued therapy for grade 3 anorexia. Grades 3-4 drug-related toxicities included thrombocytopenia (n=3), anorexia (n=2), and dehydration (n=2). Oral vorinostat 400 mg qd was generally well tolerated but did not demonstrate efficacy as defined by tumor response in this small group of heavily pre-treated patients.

Enhancement of cisplatin induced apoptosis by suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid in human oral squamous cell carcinoma cell lines

Both the resistance of tumor cells to cisplatin and dose-related toxicity remain two of the most important problems in the chemotherapy of clinical oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Researchers have been seeking a combinative treatment regimen to improve the effect of chemotherapy. As potent new anti-cancer drugs, histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACI(S)) have been reported to be associated with chromatin modification and display synergistic activities with some traditional chemotherapeutic agents. In this study, we evaluated the potential combinative effect of low dose cisplatin and suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA, one of the most potent HDACI(S)) in OSCC cell lines. Cell viability and apoptotic assay were examined. Compared with either cisplatin (4 microg/ml) or SAHA (2 microM) treated alone, co-administration of both drugs synergistically induces cytotoxicity and apoptosis in both Tca8113 and KB cell lines. Furthermore, diverse apoptosis-associated proteins, including p53, BID, cytochrome C and caspase-3 were involved in the induction of apoptosis. Our results suggest that concurrent treatment with SAHA enhances tumor cell sensitivity to subtoxic doses of cisplatin. This may be regarded as a novel strategy for treatment of OSCC.

Chemotherapy options for patients with metastatic or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

The purpose of this review is to provide readers with guidance concerning treatment of patients with advanced, recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) in the context of clinical trial data. We discuss issues surrounding the treatment of patients with SCCHN, with an emphasis on recommendations based on results from phase II and III clinical trials published since 1980. Many options exist for the treatment of patients with SCCHN. The most important decisions involve determining which patients are in need of treatment and which are most likely to benefit from treatment. Although many chemotherapy treatments have been shown to induce responses, survival improvement remains an unfulfilled goal. Definitive data do not exist on the effects of chemotherapy on quality of life or progression-free survival as measures of clinical benefit in this setting. Performance status, history of prior treatment, extent of tumor, and need for palliation are the most important factors in the decision to treat a patient with chemotherapy for incurable SCCHN. Single-agent treatment with conventional doses of methotrexate remains a standard for most patients with advanced, recurrent or metastatic SCCHN. Cisplatin plus fluorouracil, cisplatin plus a taxane, and single-agent taxane are the most widely studied alternatives. There is a need for further trials with end points other than overall survival or tumor response in this patient population. Guidelines for patient selection and treatment options are provided.

Phase I Trial and Pharmacokinetic Study of Raltitrexed in Children with Recurrent or Refractory Leukemia: A Pediatric Oncology Group Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the toxicity, antileukemic activity, and pharmacology of raltitrexed administered weekly for 3 weeks to patients with refractory or recurrent leukemia.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Raltitrexed was administered as a 15-minute infusion for 3 consecutive weeks every 5 weeks, at doses ranging from 1.3 to 2.8 mg/m(2). The first course was used to determine the dose-limiting toxicities and maximum tolerated dose. Correlative studies included an assessment of raltitrexed pharmacokinetics and measurement of plasma 2'-deoxyuridine concentrations, a surrogate measure of thymidylate synthase inhibition.

RESULTS

Twenty-one children (18 evaluable) with refractory leukemia received 25 courses of raltitrexed. The dose-limiting toxicity was reversible elevation in liver transaminases at the 2.8-mg/m(2) dose level and the maximum tolerated dose was 2.1 mg/m(2) per dose. Pharmacokinetics were best characterized by a two-compartment model with a clearance of 139 mL/min/m(2) (8.3 L/h/m(2)), a 2.4-L volume of distribution, an initial half-life (t(1/2alpha)) of 6 minutes, and a terminal half-life (t(1/2beta)) of 45 minutes. There were three objective responses.

CONCLUSIONS

Raltitrexed was well tolerated when administered as a single agent to children with recurrent or refractory leukemia. We observed preliminary evidence of antileukemia activity using this weekly dosing schedule and these observations support further evaluation of raltitrexed in this population.

Novel antifolate drugs

Antimetabolites are active chemotherapeutic agents for many solid tumor and hematologic malignancies. Folate antagonists, purine analogues, and pyrimidine analogues are the three main categories of antimetabolites. Methotrexate, the most studied folate antagonist, is effective in many malignancies. Methotrexate inhibits dihydrofolate reductase, which leads to accumulation of polyglutamated folates, causing further inhibition of thymidylate synthase and glycinamide ribonucleotide formyltransferase. Subsequently, the lack of reduced folate substrates impairs synthesis of purine nucleotides, thymidylate, and certain amino acids, which can lead to cell death. However, methotrexate resistance develops through several mechanisms, including decreased folate carrier-mediated membrane transport, dihydrofolate reductase gene amplification, specific transcription-translational modifications, and downregulation of intracellular methotrexate polyglutamation. Antifolate drug development has focused on agents designed to overcome different aspects of methotrexate resistance. This article reviews the enzymatic targets for antifolates, describes the known mechanisms of antifolate resistance, and summarizes the current development of novel antifolate agents. Discussed specifically are trimetrexate, edatrexate, raltitrexed, pemetrexed, ZD9331, lometrexol, LY309887, GW1843, OSI-7904(L), and nolatrexed, all of which have unique clinical pharmacology and are in various stages of development. The toxicity of antifolates has been sporadic and difficult to predict clinically. Supplementation with folic acid and vitamin B(12) has been shown to reduce the toxicity of pemetrexed without affecting efficacy and has increased the therapeutic index for this novel agent.