Radiotherapy alone versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage II and T3N0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma with adverse features: A propensity score-matched cohort study
•Intensity-modulated radiation therapy was compared with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.•Propensity score matching was used to balance the prognostic factors.•The addition of chemotherapy to radiation therapy had no survival benefit.•The addition of chemotherapy to radiation therapy increased acute to...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Radiotherapy and oncology 2024-05, Vol.194, p.110189, Article 110189 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •Intensity-modulated radiation therapy was compared with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.•Propensity score matching was used to balance the prognostic factors.•The addition of chemotherapy to radiation therapy had no survival benefit.•The addition of chemotherapy to radiation therapy increased acute toxicities.
Whether concurrent chemoradiotherapy would provide survival benefits in patients with stage II and T3N0 NPC with adverse factors remains unclear in IMRT era. We aimed to assess the value of concurrent chemotherapy compared to IMRT alone in stage II and T3N0 NPC with adverse features.
287 patients with stage II and T3N0 NPC with adverse factors were retrospectively analyzed, including 98 patients who received IMRT alone (IMRT alone group) and 189 patients who received cisplatin-based concurrent chemotherapy (CCRT group). The possible prognostic factors were balanced using propensity score matching (PSM). Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to evaluate the survival rates, and log-rank tests were employed to compare differences between groups.
The median follow-up duration was 90.8 months (interquartile range = 75.6–114.7 months). The IMRT alone and the CCRT group were well matched; however, for all survival-related endpoints, there were no significant differences between them (5-year failure-free survival: 84.3% vs. 82.7%, P value = 0.68; 5-year overall survival: 87.3% vs. 90.6%, P value = 0.11; 5-year distant metastasis-free survival: 92.8% vs. 92.5%, P value = 0.97; 5-year locoregional relapse-free survival: 93.4% vs. 89.9%, P value = 0.30). The incidence of acute toxicities in the IMRT alone group was significantly lower than that in the CCRT group.
For patients with stage II and T3N0 NPC with adverse features treated using IMRT, no improvement in survival was gained by adding concurrent chemotherapy; however, the occurrence of acute toxicities increased significantly. For those combined with non-single adverse factors, the comprehensive treatment strategy needs further exploration. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0167-8140 1879-0887 1879-0887 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110189 |