Lucheng Fang1, Licai Shi1, Wen Wang1, Tingting Hu1, Xingwang Rao2. 1. First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China. 2. First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China. 11124682@cumt.edu.cn.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To speculate whether induction chemotherapy (IC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) could obtain better survival benefit for stage III or IV locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). METHODS: Only randomized controlled trials were incorporated. There were five treatments (CCRT, IC + CCRT, CCRT + AC, IC + RT and RT alone) recruited for analysis. Overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) with a hazard ratio (HR) were selected as endpoints. First of all, we performed a traditional meta-analysis and subsequently conducted network meta-analysis based on the Bayesian method. RESULTS: Totally, 15 studies, including 6182 patients, were incorporated for analysis. There was a statistically significant benefits in favor of IC + CCRT, compared with CCRT alone, for OS [HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.63-0.89], LRFS [HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.56-0.86], and DMFS [HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.54-0.78]. What's more, we did not observed any significant differences between CCRT + AC and CCRT alone for all the endpoints. Unsurprisingly, it was RT alone that demonstrate the poorest survival benefit. Strange to say, survival benefit, between IC + CCRT and IC + RT, or between IC + CCRT and CCRT + AC, did not significantly exist. CONCLUSION: Induction chemotherapy IC + CCRT provided better survival benefit than CCRT alone. CCRT + AC failed to increase survival benefit significantly compared to CCRT alone. More research about comparing IC + CCRT with IC + RT or CCRT + AC are needed.
OBJECTIVE: To speculate whether induction chemotherapy (IC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) could obtain better survival benefit for stage III or IV locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). METHODS: Only randomized controlled trials were incorporated. There were five treatments (CCRT, IC + CCRT, CCRT + AC, IC + RT and RT alone) recruited for analysis. Overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) with a hazard ratio (HR) were selected as endpoints. First of all, we performed a traditional meta-analysis and subsequently conducted network meta-analysis based on the Bayesian method. RESULTS: Totally, 15 studies, including 6182 patients, were incorporated for analysis. There was a statistically significant benefits in favor of IC + CCRT, compared with CCRT alone, for OS [HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.63-0.89], LRFS [HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.56-0.86], and DMFS [HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.54-0.78]. What's more, we did not observed any significant differences between CCRT + AC and CCRT alone for all the endpoints. Unsurprisingly, it was RT alone that demonstrate the poorest survival benefit. Strange to say, survival benefit, between IC + CCRT and IC + RT, or between IC + CCRT and CCRT + AC, did not significantly exist. CONCLUSION: Induction chemotherapy IC + CCRT provided better survival benefit than CCRT alone. CCRT + AC failed to increase survival benefit significantly compared to CCRT alone. More research about comparing IC + CCRT with IC + RT or CCRT + AC are needed.
Authors: Anne W M Lee; Stewart Y Tung; Wai Tong Ng; Victor Lee; Roger K C Ngan; Horace C W Choi; Lucy L K Chan; Lillian L Siu; Alice W Y Ng; To Wai Leung; Harry H Y Yiu; Brian O'Sullivan; Rick Chappell Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-06-29 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Matthew J Page; Joanne E McKenzie; Patrick M Bossuyt; Isabelle Boutron; Tammy Hoffmann; Cynthia D Mulrow; Larissa Shamseer; David Moher Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: A Dimitrios Colevas; Sue S Yom; David G Pfister; Sharon Spencer; David Adelstein; Douglas Adkins; David M Brizel; Barbara Burtness; Paul M Busse; Jimmy J Caudell; Anthony J Cmelak; David W Eisele; Moon Fenton; Robert L Foote; Jill Gilbert; Maura L Gillison; Robert I Haddad; Wesley L Hicks; Ying J Hitchcock; Antonio Jimeno; Debra Leizman; Ellie Maghami; Loren K Mell; Bharat B Mittal; Harlan A Pinto; John A Ridge; James Rocco; Cristina P Rodriguez; Jatin P Shah; Randal S Weber; Matthew Witek; Frank Worden; Weining Zhen; Jennifer L Burns; Susan D Darlow Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Brian Hutton; Georgia Salanti; Deborah M Caldwell; Anna Chaimani; Christopher H Schmid; Chris Cameron; John P A Ioannidis; Sharon Straus; Kristian Thorlund; Jeroen P Jansen; Cynthia Mulrow; Ferrán Catalá-López; Peter C Gøtzsche; Kay Dickersin; Isabelle Boutron; Douglas G Altman; David Moher Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 25.391