| Literature DB >> 25684313 |
Benoist Chibaudel1,2,3, Roger Lacave4,5,6, Marine Lefevre7, Patrick Soussan8, Martine Antoine7, Sophie Périé9, Jean-Baptiste Belloc10, Alain Banal11, Sébastien Albert12, Frédéric Chabolle13, Philippe Céruse14, Philippe Baril15, Michel Gatineau16, Martin Housset17, Rachel Moukoko2, Magdalena Benetkiewicz2, Aimery de Gramont1,2,3, Franck Bonnetain18, Jean Lacau St Guily5,6,9.
Abstract
Induction TPF regimen is a standard treatment option for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the oropharynx. The efficacy and safety of adding cetuximab to induction TPF (ETPF) therapy was evaluated. Patients with nonmetastatic resectable stage III/IV SCC of the oropharynx were treated with weekly cetuximab followed the same day by docetaxel and cisplatin and by a continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil on days 1-5 (every 3 weeks, 3 cycles). The primary endpoint was clinical and radiological complete response (crCR) of primary tumor at 3 onths. Secondary endpoints were crCR rates, overall response, pathological CR, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Forty-two patients were enrolled, and 41 received ETPF. The all nine planned cetuximab doses and the full three doses of planned chemotherapy were completed in 31 (76%) and 36 (88%) patients, respectively. Twelve (29%) patients required dose reduction. The crCR of primary tumor at the completion of therapy was observed in nine (22%) patients. ETPF was associated with a tumor objective response rate (ORR) of 58%. The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were as follows: nonfebrile neutropenia (39%), febrile neutropenia (19%), diarrhea (10%), and stomatitis (12%). Eighteen (44%) patients experienced acne-like skin reactions of any grade. One toxic death occurred secondary to chemotherapy-induced colitis with colonic perforation. This phase II study reports an interesting response rate for ETPF in patients with moderately advanced SCC of the oropharynx. The schedule of ETPF evaluated in this study cannot be recommended at this dosage.Entities:
Keywords: Cetuximab; chemotherapy; induction therapy; oropharyngeal cancer; papillomavirus
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25684313 PMCID: PMC4430265 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.408
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Med ISSN: 2045-7634 Impact factor: 4.452
Patient characteristics at baseline of the total study population (n = 42)
| Characteristics |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Male | 34 | 81.0 |
| Female | 8 | 19.0 |
| Age in years, mean ± SD | 56.1 ± 6.8 | |
| ECOG performance status | ||
| 0 | 33 | 78.6 |
| 1 | 8 | 19.0 |
| Missing | 1 | 2.4 |
| Grade of differentiation | ||
| Well | 17 | 40.5 |
| Moderate | 18 | 42.9 |
| Poor or undifferentiated | 4 | 9.5 |
| Missing | 3 | 7.1 |
| Primary tumor localization | ||
| Anterior | 3 | 7.1 |
| Lateral (tonsil area) | 37 | 88.1 |
| Posterior | 1 | 2.4 |
| Superior | 1 | 2.4 |
| Node involvement | ||
| Group I | 1 | 2.4 |
| Group IIa | 31 | 73.8 |
| Group IIb | 9 | 21.4 |
| Group III | 10 | 23.8 |
| Group IV | 0 | – |
| Group V | 4 | 9.5 |
| Group VI | 0 | – |
| T-stage | ||
| T2 | 13 | 31.0 |
| T3 | 24 | 57.1 |
| T4 | 5 | 11.9 |
| N-stage | ||
| N0 | 5 | 11.9 |
| N1 | 9 | 21.4 |
| N2 | 27 | 64.3 |
| N3 | 1 | 2.4 |
| Staging | ||
| III | 32 | 76.2 |
| IV | 10 | 23.8 |
| Lip mobility | ||
| Normal | 40 | 95.2 |
| Decreased | 2 | 4.8 |
| Trismus | ||
| Yes | 5 | 11.9 |
| No | 37 | 88.1 |
| Creatinine clearance (mL/min) | ||
| <60 | 1 | 2.4 |
| 60–120 | 31 | 73.8 |
| >120 | 8 | 19.1 |
| Albuminemia (g/L) | ||
| <40 | 8 | 19.1 |
| ≥60 | 14 | 33.3 |
| Missing | 20 | 47.6 |
| Life style risk factors | ||
| Alcohol | 3 | 7.1 |
| Tobacco | 8 | 19.0 |
| Alcohol + tobacco | 25 | 59.5 |
| None | 6 | 14.3 |
| HPV16 status | ||
| Positive | 17 | 40.5 |
| Negative | 25 | 59.5 |
SD, standard deviation; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.
Figure 1CONSORT diagram.
Tumor response rates at 3 months in the modified intent-to-treat population (n = 41)
| Tumor | Node | Tumor and node | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical response (cR) | |||
| Complete (cCR) | 17 (41.5) | 15 (36.6) | 13 (31.7) |
| Incomplete | 21 (51.2) | 23 (56.1) | 25 (61.0) |
| Progression | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Not evaluable | 3 (7.3) | 3 (7.3) | 3 (7.3) |
| Radiological response (rR) | |||
| Complete (rCR) | 14 (34.1) | 8 (19.5) | 4 (9.8) |
| Major partial response (≥50%) | 10 (24.4) | 14 (34.1) | 11 (26.8) |
| Minor partial response (<50%) | 0 | 3 (7.3) | 3 (7.3) |
| Stable disease | 6 (14.6) | 6 (14.6) | 10 (24.4) |
| Progression | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Not evaluable | 11 (26.8) | 10 (24.4) | 13 (31.7) |
| Clinical and radiological response (crR) | |||
| Complete (crCR) | 9 (22.0) | 8 (19.5) | 4 (9.8) |
| Incomplete | 29 (70.7) | 27 (65.8) | 31 (75.6) |
| Progression | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Not evaluable | 3 (7.3) | 6 (14.6) | 6 (14.6) |
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier survival curves of progression-free survival (A) and overall survival (B). Thick line defines survival curve and thin line denotes confidence boundaries placed around the true survival curve.
Safety evaluation carried out during induction treatment and follow-up in the modified intent-to-treat population (n = 41)
| Adverse event | NCI-CTCAE v3.0 common toxicity criteria | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 0 | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 | Grade 4 | |
| Hematologic toxicity | |||||
| Neutropenia | 22 (53.7) | 0 | 2 (4.9) | 6 (14.6) | 10 (24.4) |
| Anemia | 7 (17.1) | 26 (63.4) | 7 (17.1) | 0 | 0 |
| Thrombocytopenia | 31 (75.6) | 9 (21.9) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Febrile neutropenia | 32 (78.1) | 0 | 0 | 8 (19.5) | 0 |
| Nonhematologic toxicity | |||||
| Nausea | 25 (61.0) | 8 (19.5) | 7 (17.1) | 1 (2.4) | 0 |
| Vomiting | 28 (68.3) | 8 (19.5) | 4 (9.8) | 1 (2.4) | 0 |
| Stomatitis | 27 (65.8) | 5 (12.2) | 4 (9.8) | 5 (12.2) | 0 |
| Diarrhea | 14 (34.1) | 12 (29.3) | 11 (26.8) | 3 (7.3) | 1 (2.4) |
| Neuropathy | 37 (90.2) | 3 (7.3) | 1 (2.4) | 0 | 0 |
| Acne-like skin reactions | 23 (56.1) | 9 (21.9) | 7 (17.1) | 2 (4.9) | 0 |
| Creatinine | 32 (78.1) | 7 (17.1) | 2 (4.9) | 0 | 0 |
NCI-CTC, National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.
Biomarker levels analysis according to tumor response in the patients for whom pretreatment formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue block, and cryopreserved tumor blocks were available (n = 38)
| Response [95% CI] | All ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Complete ( | Incomplete ( | ||
| EGFR | |||
| Median (min, max) | 0.6 [0.1;2] | 0.7 [0.1;89.6] | 0.6 [0.1;89.6] |
| Mean (SD) | 0.8 (0.7) | 4.1 (17.1) | 3.3 (14.8) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| EGF | |||
| Median (min, max) | 0.8 [0.1;3.3] | 0.7 [0.1;76] | 0.7 [0.1;76] |
| Mean (SD) | 1.1 (1.1) | 3.9 (14.5) | 3.2 (12.5) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| TGF | |||
| Median (min, max) | 4.2 [1.6;15.4] | 4.6 [0.6;33] | 4.4 [0.6;33] |
| Mean (SD) | 5.3 (4.1) | 8.2 (8.9) | 7.5 (8) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| HB-EGF | |||
| Median (min, max) | 8.8 [0.6;28.9] | 7.1 [0.7;66.9] | 7.5 [0.6;66.9] |
| Mean (SD) | 9.9 (9) | 15.8 (17.7) | 14.3 (16) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| BTC | |||
| Median (min, max) | 3.6 [0.9;8.6] | 3.1 [0;68.3] | 3.2 [0;68.3] |
| Mean (SD) | 3.9 (2.6) | 6.6 (12.9) | 5.9 (11.2) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| AREG | |||
| Median (min, max) | 0.2 [0;3] | 0.2 [0;92.9] | 0.2 [0;92.9] |
| Mean (SD) | 0.7 (1.1) | 9.8 (24.8) | 7.5 (21.8) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| EREG | |||
| Median (min, max) | 0 [0;0.9] | 0 [0;9.5] | 0 [0;9.5] |
| Mean (SD) | 0.2 (0.3) | 0.7 (1.9) | 0.6 (1.7) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| Allele 1 intron 1 CA repeats | |||
| Median (min, max) | 16 [16;20] | 16 [14;20] | 16 [14;20] |
| Mean (SD) | 16.7 (1.4) | 16.4 (1.4) | 16.5 (1.4) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| Allele 2 intron 1 CA repeats | |||
| Median (min, max) | 17 [16;20] | 19 [15;22] | 18 [15;22] |
| Mean (SD) | 17.2 (1.4) | 18.5 (2.2) | 18.2 (2.1) |
| | 9 | 27 | 36 |
| EGFRvIII mutation | |||
| No | 5 (62.5%) | 23 (88.5%) | 28 (82.4%) |
| Yes | 3 (37.5%) | 3 (11.5%) | 6 (17.7%) |
| EGFR amplification | |||
| No | 3 (50%) | 19 (82.6%) | 22 (75.9%) |
| Yes | 3 (50%) | 4 (17.4%) | 7 (24.1%) |
EGF, epidermal growth factor; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TGFα, transforming growth factor α; HB-EGF, heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor; BTC, betacellulin; AREG, amphiregulin; EREG, epiregulin; AREG, amphiregulin; EREG, epiregulin; SD, standard deviation.
Distribution of alcohol and tobacco use according to HPV16 status in the total study population (n = 42)
| Use | HPV16-positive ( | HPV16-negative ( | All ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alcohol only | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Tobacco only | 5 | 3 | 8 |
| Both alcohol and tobacco | 8 | 17 | 25 |
| None | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Total | 17 | 25 | 42 |
HPV16, human papillomavirus type-16.