Outcome of patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell head and neck cancer treated with platinum‑based chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in real‑world practice

Abstract

Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell head and neck cancer (R/M SCHNC) exhibit a poor prognosis with a median overall survival (OS) time of <1 year. Platinum-based chemotherapy with or without cetuximab has been the standard of care in the last decade. The aim of the current retrospective study was to evaluate the outcome and tolerability of treatment in patients with R/M SCHNC receiving platinum/5-fluorouracil/cetuximab (PFE) chemotherapy compared with platinum/5-fluorouracil (PF) chemotherapy in daily clinical practice. A retrospective analysis was performed using the data of patients treated at the Institute of Oncology Ljubljana between April 2008 and May 2018. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Multivariate regression Cox analysis was used to determine independent prognostic factors. A total of 67 patients were treated at the aforementioned Institute: 34 patients received the PF and 33 the PFE regimen. The mean age of patients was 54.6 years and 91% of patients were male. Median PFS time was 6.6 vs. 7.1 months for the PF vs. PFE groups, respectively (P=0.852). Median OS time was 9.6 vs. 11.5 months for the PF vs. PFE groups, respectively (P=0.029). The prognostic factor for PFS was partial remission [hazard ratio (HR), 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70; P=0.004]. Prognostic factors for OS were partial remission (HR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.06-0.38; P<0.001) or stable disease (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.13-0.64; P=0.002), and a subsequent line of treatment upon progression (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15-0.52; P<0.001). In the PFE group, 15.4% of patients had a grade >2 infusion reaction to cetuximab and 27.3% had grade 3 skin rash. There were no differences in diarrhoea, hypomagnesaemia, infections and febrile neutropenia; however, the mortality on active treatment was high (13.4%). In conclusion, patients treated with PFE had similar PFS, but improved OS compared with patients treated with the PF protocol. The proportion of patients who died under treatment due to disease progression and toxicity was high in both treatment arms. A thorough selection of patients for this treatment is crucial.