BackgroundMany patients with cancer experience depression and anxiety, and an associated decrease in quality of life (QOL) during radiation therapy (RT). The main objective of the study was to determine the benefits of psychosocial interventions for cancer patients who received RT.MethodsPatients with cancer (n = 178) who agreed to participate in the study were randomized to the intervention arm (n = 89) or the control arm (n = 89). Patients in the intervention group received psychosocial care during RT, whereas the control group received RT only. The benefits of the intervention were evaluated using the Zung Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) to measure depression, the Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) to assess anxiety, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) to survey health-related QOL. The association between intervention and survival was also assessed.ResultsPatients randomly assigned to the intervention arm showed significant improvements on symptoms of depression (p < 0.05) and anxiety (p < 0.05), health-related QOL (p < 0.05) (i.e. better global health status, and physical and emotional functioning, and less insomnia) when compared with controls. In the subset analysis, female patients, those that received high dose irradiation, and those that underwent adjuvant chemotherapy could benefit more from psychosocial intervention. There was no difference between the two groups in disease-free survival (DFS) (2-year DFS 79.8% in the intervention arm and 76.4% in the control arm; p = 0.527) and overall survival (OS) (2-year OS 83.1% in the intervention arm and 84.3% in the control arm; p = 0.925)ConclusionsPsychosocial intervention is a cost-effective approach that can improve a patient’s mood and QOL both during and after RT. However, the intervention was not found to reduce the risk of cancer recurrence and death.Trial registrationChiCTR-TRC-12002438

BackgroundNasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is especially prevalent in southeast Asia and southern China, but its molecular mechanisms remain poorly characterized. DNA methylation is associated with initiation and progression of tumors, including NPC. Through a genome-wide DNA methylation screening approach, we discovered ZNF154, but its methylation status and roles in NPC have not been investigated.MethodsThe methylation status of ZNF154 in NPC was detected with Methylation specific-PCR (MSP) and Quantitative Sequenom MassARRAY. The invasion and migration capacities were examined by wound healing and transwell invasion assays. The role of ZNF154 in NPC metastasis was clarified with experimental metastasis assay in vivo. Western blotting analysis was used to investigate protein changes followed by ZNF154 over-expression. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine the association between ZNF154 methylation and prognosis in NPC.ResultsCompared to immortalized nasopharyngeal tissues and cells, ZNF154 expression was frequently downregulated in NPC tissues and cell lines due to promoter methylation. Demethylation treatment with 5-aza-2-deoxycytidine (5-Aza) restored ZNF154 expression in NPC cell lines. Ectopic overexpression of ZNF154 in NPC cells inhibited cell migration and invasion in vitro and lung nodule formation in an in vivo tumor metastasis assay. Mechanistic investigations suggested ZNF154 inhibits Wnt/β-catenin signalling pathway activation and prevents the EMT in NPC. Furthermore, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed hypermethylation of the ZNF154 promoter was associated with significantly poorer disease-free survival (P = 0.032) and distant metastasis-free survival (P = 0.040) among patients with locoregionally advanced NPC.ConclusionsTaken together, these findings define a novel role for ZNF154 as a tumor suppressor in NPC.

No abstract

BackgroundThe relative efficacy of induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) versus IC followed by radiotherapy (RT) alone in locoregionally advanced NPC remains unclear.MethodsA total of 877 patients with locally advanced NPC who underwent IC/CCRT or IC/RT at four institutions in China between January 2004 and December 2010 were retrospectively assessed. IC was cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy; concurrent chemotherapy, single agent cisplatin. Two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2DCRT) was the radiotherapy technique. All patients were matched in an equal ratio using a pair-matched method. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS) and toxicities were assessed.ResultsEligible patients were matched (n = 642; 321 patients per arm) based on eight clinicopathological characteristics. Five-year OS, DFS, DMFS, and LRRFS were 76%, 70%, 86%, and 88% for IC/CCRT and 75%, 70%, 90%, and 91% for IC/RT, respectively. There were no statistically significant survival differences between arms (P>0.05), even in subgroup analysis. In multivariate analysis, treatment (IC/CCRT vs. IC/RT) was not an independent prognostic factor for any survival end-point. Grade 3/4 acute gastrointestinal toxicities (vomiting, nausea) and hematological toxicities (leucopenia/neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia) were significantly more common in the IC/CCRT arm than IC/RT arm during RT.ConclusionOverall, IC/CCRT failed to demonstrate any survival advantage but higher acute toxicities over IC/RT in locoregionally advanced NPC.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of induction-concurrent (IC-CCRT) with concurrent-adjuvant (CCRT-AC) chemotherapy in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC) treated by intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Materials and Methods: Data on 834 patients with newly diagnosed, non-metastatic stage III-IVA (except T3N0) NPC receiving either IC-CCRT or CCRT-AC between July, 2004 and December, 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching (PSM) method was adopted to balance prognostic factors and match patients. Survival outcomes of matched patients between IC-CCRT and CCRT-AC were compared. Results: The median follow-up duration is 45.2 months (range, 1.07-145.4 months). Overall, 309 pairs were selected by PSM. Univariate analysis revealed the CCRT-AC group achieved significantly higher 3-year DFS (83.9% vs. 78.7 %; P = 0.014) and OS (87.6% vs. 87.0%; P = 0.031). Multivariate analysis also identified treatment group (IC-CCRT vs. CCRT-AC) as an independent prognostic factor for 3-year DFS (HR, 1.546; 95% CI, 1.113-2.149; P = 0.009) and OS (HR, 1.487; 95% CI, 1.035-2.136; P = 0.032). Subgroup analysis revealed IC-CCRT was a protective factor for DMFS (HR, 0.145; 95% CI, 0.043-0.488; P = 0.002) in stage III disease; however, it could adversely affected DFS (HR, 2.009; 95% CI, 1.316-3.065; P = 0.001), OS (HR, 1.671; 95% CI, 1.060-2.636; P = 0.027) and DMFS (HR, 1.986; 95% CI, 1.155-3.416; P = 0.013) in stage IVA disease. Conclusions: CCRT-AC may be a more effective treatment modality in patients with stage IVA NPC disease, while IC-CCRT was superior in stage III disease.