BACKGROUND:A current recommendation for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is conventional fractionated radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin plus adjuvant cisplatin and fluorouracil (PF). In this randomized trial, the authors evaluated the potential therapeutic benefit from changing to an induction-concurrent chemotherapy sequence, replacing fluorouracil with oral capecitabine, and/or using accelerated rather than conventional radiotherapy fractionation. METHODS: Patients with stage III through IVB, nonkeratinizing NPC were randomly allocated to 1 of 6 treatment arms. The protocol was amended in 2009 to permit confining randomization to the conventional fractionation arms. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and safety. RESULTS: In total, 803 patients were accrued, and 706 patients were randomly allocated to all 6 treatment arms. Comparisons of induction PF versus adjuvant PF did not indicate a significant improvement. Unadjusted comparisons of induction cisplatin and capecitabine (PX) versus adjuvant PF indicated a favorable trend in progression-free survival for the conventional fractionation arm (P 5.045); analyses that were adjusted for other significant factors and fractionation reflected a significant reduction in the hazards of disease progression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.80) and death (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25-0.70). Unadjusted comparisons of induction sequences versus adjuvant sequences did not reach statistical significance, but adjusted comparisons indicated favorable improvements by induction sequence. Comparisons of induction PX versus induction PF revealed fewer toxicities (neutropenia and electrolyte disturbance), unadjusted comparisons of efficacy were statistically insignificant, but adjusted analyses indicated that induction PX had a lower hazard of death (HR, 0.57; 95% CI,. Changing the fractionation from conventional to accelerated did not achieve any benefit but incurred higher toxicities (acute mucositis and dehydration). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary results indicate that the benefit of changing to an induction-concurrent sequence remains uncertain; replacing fluorouracil with oral capecitabine warrants further validation in view of its convenience, favorable toxicity profile, and favorable trends in efficacy; and accelerated fractionation is not recommended for patients with locoregionally advanced NPC who receive chemoradiotherapy. Cancer 2015;121:1328-38.

Objective To develop a nomogram for refining prognostication for patients with non-disseminated nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) staged with the proposed AJCC/UICC 8th edition. Material and methods Consecutive patients investigated by magnetic resonance imaging, staged by the proposed AJCC/UICC 8th edition, and irradiated by intensity- modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) from June 2005 to December 2010 were analyzed. The cohort of 1197 patients treated at Fujian Provincial Cancer Hospital was used as the training set and the results were validated by 412 patients from Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital. Cox regression analyses were performed to identify significant prognostic factors for developing a nomogram to predict overall survival (OS). The discriminative ability was assessed with concordance index (C-index). Patients were categorized into three risk groups by performing recursive partitioning algorithm (RPA) on the survival scores of the combined set. Results Multivariable analysis showed that age, gross primary tumor volume (GTV-P) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) were independent prognostic factors for OS in addition to stage-group. The OS nomogram based on all these factors had a statistically higher bias-corrected C-index than prognostication based on stage-group alone (0.712 vs 0.622, p<0.01). These results were consistent for both the training and the validation cohorts. Patients with <135 points were categorized as low-risk, ≥135–<160 points as intermediate-risk and ≥160 points as high-risk, respectively. Their 5-year OS rates were 92%, 84% and 58%, respectively. Conclusions The proposed nomogram could improve prognostication when compared with TNM stage-group. This could aid in risk stratification for individual NPC patients.

Long-term results have confirmed that CRT can significantly improve OS without excessive late toxicities for patients with regionally advanced NPC. However, more potent therapy is needed for improving distant control, especially for patients with stage IVA/B disease. Cancer 2017;123:4147-4157. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

No abstract

Background: The IMbrave 150 trial revealed that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo–bev) improves survival in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (1 year survival rate: 67.2% vs. 54.6%). We assessed the cost-effectiveness of atezo–bev vs. sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable HCC from the US payer perspective. Methods: Using data from the IMbrave 150, we developed a Markov model to compare the lifetime cost and efficacy of atezo–bev as first-line systemic therapy in HCC with those of sorafenib. The main outcomes were life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Atezo–bev demonstrated a gain of 0.44 QALYs, with an additional cost of USD 79,074. The ICER of atezo–bev was USD 179,729 per QALY when compared with sorafenib. The model was most sensitive to the overall survival hazard ratio and body weight. If we assumed that all patients at the end of the IMbrave 150 trial were cured of HCC, atezo–bev was cost-effective (ICER USD 53,854 per QALY). However, if all patients followed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data, the ICER of atezo–bev was USD 385,857 per QALY. Reducing the price of atezo–bev by 20% and 29% would satisfy the USD 150,000/QALY and 100,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Moreover, capping the duration of therapy to ≤12 months or reducing the dosage of bev to ≤10 mg/kg would render atezo–bev cost-effective. Conclusions: The long-term effectiveness of atezo–bev is a critical but uncertain determinant of its cost-effectiveness. Price reduction would favorably influence cost-effectiveness, even if long-term clinical outcomes were modest. Further studies to optimize the duration and dosage of therapy are warranted.