Cisplatin and Fluorouracil Alone or with Docetaxel in Head and Neck Cancer

Posner, Marshall R.; Hershock, Diane; Blajman, C.; Mickiewicz, E.; Winquist, Eric; Gorbounova, Vera; Tjulandin, Sergei; Shin, Dong M.; Cullen, Kevin J.; Ervin, Thomas J.; Murphy, Barbara A.; Raez, Luis E.; Cohen, Roger B.; Spaulding, Monica B.; Tishler, Roy B.; Roth, Berta; Viroglio, Rosana del Carmen; Venkatesan, Varagur; Романов, И. С.; Agarwala, Sanjiv S.; Harter, K. William; Dugan, Matthew; Cmelak, Anthony J.; Markoe, Arnold M.; Read, Paul W.; Steinbrenner, Lynn; Colevas, A. Dimitrios; Norris, Charles M.; Haddad, Robert I.

doi:10.1056/nejmoa070956

Cited by 1,546 publications

(1,190 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,092

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another important aspect of whether induction chemotherapy is effective or not, is the individual components that make up the induction regimen. For example, several studies have shown that TPF compared to PF is more effective regimen in the induction setting 21, 22, 24. However, due to the limitations of the database that was used in this study, we are unable to draw any conclusions regarding the use of various chemotherapy regimens and its effect on OS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…For example, induction chemotherapy may only be beneficial in patients with high‐risk disease, such as T3‐4 or N2‐3. The authors of the trials with positive results with induction therapy state that it has been the use of more effective induction regimen, such as TPF chemotherapy, as well as inclusion of only patients with high risk disease that has resulted in a significant OS benefit with the use of induction chemotherapy 8, 21, 22, 23. We performed a subset analysis on patients with high risk disease and found no significant survival advantage with the use of induction chemotherapy even in the most advanced stage NPC (ie T3‐4N1 or TanyN2‐3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Induction chemotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Clinical outcomes and patterns of care

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of induction chemotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) remains controversial. The primary aim of this study was to use the National Cancer Database to evaluate the patterns of care of induction chemotherapy in NPC and its impact on overall survival (OS). Patients with NPC from 2004 to 2014 were obtained from the NCDB. Patients were considered to have received induction chemotherapy if it was started ≥43 days before the start of RT and concurrent CRT if chemotherapy started within 21 days after the start of RT. Propensity score matching was used to control for selection bias. Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine significant predictors of OS. Logistic regression model was used to determine predictors of the use of induction chemotherapy. Significance was defined as a P value <.05. A total of 4857 patients were identified: 4041 patients (87.2%) received concurrent CRT and 816 patients (16.8%) received induction chemotherapy. The use of induction therapy remained stable between 2004 and 2014. Younger patients and those with higher T‐ and N‐stage had a higher likelihood of being treated with induction chemotherapy. The 5‐year OS in patients treated with induction chemotherapy and CRT was 66.3% vs 69.1%, respectively (P = .25). There was no difference in OS when these two groups were analyzed after propensity score matching. No differences in OS existed between these treatment groups in patients with T3‐T4N1 or TanyN2‐3 disease (P = .76). Propensity score matching also did not reveal any difference in OS in patients with T3‐T4N1 or TanyN2‐3 disease. The use of induction chemotherapy has remained stable in the last decade. In this study of patients with NPC, induction chemotherapy was not associated with improved OS compared to CRT alone.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Induction chemotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Clinical outcomes and patterns of care

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is an attempt to combine the gains observed with both induction chemotherapy (resulting in decreased distant metastases) and concurrent CRT (resulting in improved locoregional control). 33,34 It remains unclear at this point if sequential treatment will provide a survival advantage over concurrent CRT; randomized trials addressing this question are currently being conducted. 35,36 The most recent attempt at optimizing the induction regimen in a sequential treatment approach has been the TAX 324 study, 33 which is a phase III registration trial comparing two induction regimens, TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-FU) and PF (cisplatin, 5-FU), each followed by concurrent CRT with carboplatin (administered weekly at an area under the concentration-time curve of 1.5).…”

Section: Sequential Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…33,34 It remains unclear at this point if sequential treatment will provide a survival advantage over concurrent CRT; randomized trials addressing this question are currently being conducted. 35,36 The most recent attempt at optimizing the induction regimen in a sequential treatment approach has been the TAX 324 study, 33 which is a phase III registration trial comparing two induction regimens, TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-FU) and PF (cisplatin, 5-FU), each followed by concurrent CRT with carboplatin (administered weekly at an area under the concentration-time curve of 1.5). After a median follow-up of 42 months, the TPF arm demonstrated statistically significant improvement in both median PFS (36 vs. 13 months) as well as OS (62% vs. 48%) compared with the PF arm.…”

Section: Sequential Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Chemotherapy in the Management of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

Savvides

2010

Seminars in Plastic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in the management of patients with head and neck cancer point to an expanding role of chemotherapy, resulting in an increased involvement of the medical oncologist in the multidisciplinary care of these patients. This review focuses on patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, pharynx, and larynx. A comprehensive review of the clinical trial data that have defined new standards of care and a detailed presentation of widely used chemotherapeutic regimens, including both cytotoxic and molecularly targeted agents, are presented. Information on human papilloma virusassociated squamous cell cancer of the head and neck is presented, and implications in the clinical management of this subgroup of patients based on the epidemiologic and pathologic characteristics are discussed.KEYWORDS: Cancer of the head and neck, chemotherapy, squamous cell carcinoma Approximately 48,000 new cases of head and neck cancer were expected in the United States in 2009 alone, 1 and more than 600,000 new cases will be diagnosed worldwide. Head and neck cancer accounts for 3 to 4% of all cancer diagnoses in Western countries, 2,3 and its incidence is higher in southeast Asia and in Africa where it accounts for 8 to 10% of all cancers. 4 Overall, head and neck cancer represents the eighth most common cause of cancer death.Historically, treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SSCHN) has primarily been driven by surgical interventions and continued advances in radiation therapy (RT) treatment planning and delivery. In this setting of complex treatment algorithms, recent advances in the management of patients with head and neck cancer point to an expanding role of chemotherapy and therefore an increased involvement of the medical oncologist in the multidisciplinary care of these patients.The scope of this review is to provide a comprehensive description of expanding chemotherapeutic options, including both cytotoxic and molecularly targeted agents, that are applicable to patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx. Data on patients diagnosed with cancer of the nasopharynx will be presented separately because of its distinct etiology, pathology, and response to treatment modalities.Chemotherapy alone does not have curative potential. As a result, it does not have a defined role

show abstract

“…Rates of grade 3/4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were higher for the TPF group in both studies, although treatment delays because of neutropenia, grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, and fatigue were more frequent in the PF group. 11 Pointreau et al also reported that TPF was significantly better than PF alone in preserving the larynx at 3 years in patients with advanced cancers of the larynx and hypopharynx who required total laryngectomy. 13 Patients in the TPF group had more grade 4 or febrile neutropenia compared with patients in the PF group, who had more grade 3/4 stomatitis and grade 4 creatinine elevation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Head and neck carcinoma in the United States

Ang¹,

Chen²,

Curran³

et al. 2012

Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Detailed information about how patients with head and neck carcinoma (HNC) are treated across practice settings does not exist. The authors conducted a prospective, observational study to examine the patterns of care for a series of patients with newly diagnosed HNC in the United States and to test 2 hypotheses: 1) There is no difference in the pattern of care between community and academic settings; and 2) the results of major randomized clinical trials will change the pattern of care in both practice settings within 1 year of publication in peer-reviewed journals. METHODS: Patients aged !18 years were enrolled in the Longitudinal Oncology Registry of Head and Neck Carcinoma (LORHAN) after providing written informed consent if they had a confirmed diagnosis of new HNC and were scheduled to receive treatment other than surgery alone. RESULTS: Between 2005 and 2010, 100 centers enrolled 4243 patients, including 2612 patients (62%) from academic investigators and 1631 patients (38%) from community centers. Initial treatments were radiation with concurrent chemotherapy (30%) or cetuximab (9%), adjuvant radiotherapy (21%), induction chemotherapy (16%), and other (24%). Intensity modulated radiation therapy was the dominant radiation technique (84%). Singleagent cisplatin was prescribed in nearly half of patients and more often in academic centers (53% vs 43% of patients; P < .0001). Single-agent cetuximab was the next most common drug used (19%) and was prescribed more frequently in community settings (24% vs 17%; P ¼ .0001). The data rejected the 2 prospective hypotheses. CONCLUSIONS: LORHAN documented differences in patient characteristics and treatments between community and academic settings for a large series of patients in the United States. Cancer 2012;118:5783-92.

show abstract

Cisplatin and Fluorouracil Alone or with Docetaxel in Head and Neck Cancer

Cited by 1,546 publications

References 28 publications

Induction chemotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Clinical outcomes and patterns of care

Induction chemotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Clinical outcomes and patterns of care

The Role of Chemotherapy in the Management of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

Head and neck carcinoma in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About