Strahlentherapie und Onkologie

, Volume 192, Issue 6, pp 394–402 | Cite as

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma

A matched-pair multicenter analysis of outcomes
  • Yi-Yuan Dong
  • Chun Xiang
  • Jian-Xun Lu
  • Yi-Xin Su
  • Yu-Fei Pan
  • Rui Cai
  • Rong-Jun Zhang
  • Zhuo-Kai He
  • Mei-Lian Liu
  • Hui Huang
  • Xue Bai
  • Hua-Ying Tang
  • Yun-Hua Shi
  • Yan Wang
  • Wei JiangEmail author
Original Article



The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is controversial. This study compared concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus AC (CCRT/AC) with CCRT.


Pair-matched analysis based on eight clinicopathological features of 244 patients treated with platinum-based CCRT/AC or CCRT alone was performed. Survival outcomes were assessed using the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test. Toxicities and response rates were compared using Fisher’s exact test.


Four-year overall survival, progression-free survival, distant failure-free survival, and locoregional failure-free survival were 72 %, 61 %, 71 %, and 81 %, respectively, for the CCRT arm, compared to 74 % (hazard ratio, HR 0.89; 95 % confidence interval, CI 0.64–1.23; P = 0.474), 62 % (HR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.68–1.20, P = 0.489), 73 % (HR 0.84, 95 % CI 0.59–1.18, P = 0.316), and 84 % (HR 0.84, 95 % CI 0.52–1.24, P = 0.323), respectively, for the CCRT/AC arm. Cox multivariate regression analysis demonstrated AC was not an independent prognostic factor. Overall, there was a higher incidence of grade 3–4 toxicities in the CCRT/AC arm. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the CCRT/AC arm were vomiting (27 %), nausea (43 %), leukopenia/neutropenia (23 %), thrombocytopenia (8.8 %), and anemia (6.2 %).


Addition of AC to CCRT increased toxicities but did not improve survival in locoregionally advanced NPC.


Survival Adverse events Toxicity Radiation oncology China 

Simultane Radiochemotherapie plus adjuvante Chemotherapie versus alleinige simultane Radiochemotherapie beim lokal fortgeschrittenen Nasopharynxkarzinom

Eine multizentrische „Matched-pair“-Analyse zum Outcome



Der Nutzen der adjuvanten Chemotherapie (AC) bei lokoregional fortgeschrittenem nasopharyngealem Karzinom (NPC) ist kontrovers. In dieser Studie wurde die simultane Radiochemotherapie („concurrent chemoradiotherapy“, CCRT) plus adjuvante Chemotherapie (AC) mit einer alleinigen CCRT verglichen.

Patienten und Methoden

Die Matched-pair-Analyse basiert auf acht klinisch-pathologischen Merkmalen von 244 Patienten, die mit platinbasierter CCRT/AC oder alleiniger CCRT behandelt wurden. Die Überlebensendpunkte wurden mit der Kaplan-Meier-Methode und dem Log-Rang-Test beurteilt. Toxische Reaktionen und Ansprechraten wurden mit dem exakten Fisher-Test verglichen.


Das Vier-Jahres-Gesamtüberleben, das progressionsfreie Überleben, das fernmetastasenfreie Überleben ohne Therapieversagen und das lokoregionale Überleben ohne Therapieversagen betrugen jeweils 72 %, 61 %, 71 % bzw. 81 % im CCRT-Arm im Vergleich mit 74 % (Hazard-Ratio [HR] 0,89; 95 %-Konfidenzintervall [KI] 0,64–1,23; p = 0,474), 62 % (HR 0,91; 95 %-KI 0,68–1,20; p = 0,489), 73 % (HR 0,84; 95 %-KI 0,59–1,18; p = 0,316) und 84 % (HR 0,84; 95 %-KI 0,52–1,24; p = 0,323) im CCRT/AC-Arm. Die multivariate Cox-Regressionsanalyse zeigte, dass AC kein unabhängiger Prognosefaktor war. Insgesamt lag im CCRT/AC-Arm eine höhere Inzidenz von toxischen Reaktionen vom Grad 3–4 vor. Die häufigsten unerwünschten Ereignisse vom Grad 3–4 im CCRT/AC-Arm waren Erbrechen (27 %), Übelkeit (43 %), Leukopenie/Neutropenie (23 %), Thrombozytopenie (8,8 %) und Anämie (6,2 %).


Eine zusätzliche AC zur CCRT erhöhte die toxischen Reaktionen, führte jedoch zu keiner Verbesserung des Überlebens bei lokal fortgeschrittenem NPC.


Überleben Nebenwirkungen Toxizität Strahlenonkologie China 



This work was supported by grants from the Scientific Research and Technology Development Program of Guilin (No. 20110119-1-3), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81560443), the Guangxi National Natural Science Foundation (No. 2013GXNSFBA019155), the Guangxi Medical Scientific Experiment Center Open Fund (GK2014-TKF04), and the Scientific Research and Technology Development Program of Qinzhou (No. 20136115).

Compliance with ethical guidelines

Conflict of interest

Y.-Y. Dong, C. Xiang, J.-X. Lu, Y.-X. Su, Y.-F. Pan, R. Cai, R.-J. Zhang, Z.-K. He, M.-L. Liu, H. Huang, X. Bai, H.-Y. Tang, Y.-H. Shi, Y. Wang, and W. Jiang state that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical standards

All studies on humans described in the present manuscript were carried out with the approval of the responsible ethics committee and in accordance with national law and the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (in its current, revised form). Informed consent was obtained from all patients included in studies.


  1. 1.
    Yu KH, Leung SF, Tung SY et al (2005) Survival outcome of patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma with first local failure: a study by the Hong Kong Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Study Group. Head Neck 27:397–405CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen Y, Sun Y, Liang SB et al (2013) Progress report of a randomized trial comparing long-term survival and late toxicity of concurrent chemoradiotherapy with adjuvant chemotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in patients with stage III to IVB nasopharyngeal carcinoma from endemic regions of China. Cancer 119:2230–2238CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee AW, Ng WT, Chan YH, Sze H, Chan C, Lam TH (2012) The battle against nasopharyngeal cancer. Radiother Oncol 104:272–278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Poplin EA, Benedetti JK, Estes NC et al (2005) Phase III Southwest Oncology Group 9415/Intergroup 0153 randomized trial of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and levamisole versus fluorouracil continuous infusion and levamisole for adjuvant treatment of stage III and high-risk stage II colon cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:1819–1825CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365:1687–1717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wee J, Tan EH, Tai BC et al (2005) Randomized trial of radiotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union against cancer stage III and IV nasopharyngeal cancer of the endemic variety. J Clin Oncol 23:6730–6738CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee AWM, Tung SY, Ngan RKC et al (2011) Factors contributing to the efficacy of concurrent-adjuvant chemotherapy for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Combined analyses of NPC-9901 and NPC-9902 Trials. Eur J Cancer 47:656–666CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen L, Hu CS, Chen XZ et al (2012) Concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 13:163–171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kwong DL, Sham JS, Au GK et al (2004) Concurrent and adjuvant chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a factorial study. J Clin Oncol 22:2643–2653CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    OuYang PY, Xie C, Mao YP et al (2013) Significant efficacies of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma by meta-analysis of published literature-based randomized, controlled trials. Ann Oncol 24:2136–2146CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garden AS, Harris J, Vokes EE et al (2004) Preliminary results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 97-03: a randomized phase ii trial of concurrent radiation and chemotherapy for advanced squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. J Clin Oncol 22:2856–2864CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schemper MSTL (1996) A note on quantifying follow-up in studies of failure time. Control Clin Trials 17:343–346CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jiang H, Fine JP (2007) Survival analysis. Methods Mol Biol 404:303–318CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chan ATC, Leung SF, Ngan RKC et al (2005) Overall survival after concurrent cisplatin-radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Natl Cancer I 97:536–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fountzilas G, Ciuleanu E, Bobos M et al (2012) Induction chemotherapy followed by concomitant radiotherapy and weekly cisplatin versus the same concomitant chemoradiotherapy in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a randomized phase II study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group (HeCOG) with biomarker evaluation. Ann Oncol 23:427–435CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Al-Sarraf M, LeBlanc M, Giri PG et al (1998) Chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy in patients with advanced nasopharyngeal cancer: phase III randomized Intergroup study 0099. J Clin Oncol 16:1310–1317PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chan AT, Teo PM, Leung TW et al (1995) A prospective randomized study of chemotherapy adjunctive to definitive radiotherapy in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 33:569–577CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chi KH, Chang YC, Guo WY et al (2002) A phase III study of adjuvant chemotherapy in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 52:1238–1244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rossi A, Molinari R, Boracchi P et al (1988) Adjuvant chemotherapy with vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin after radiotherapy in local-regional nasopharyngeal cancer: results of a 4‑year multicenter randomized study. J Clin Oncol 6:1401–1410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen YP, Wang ZX, Chen L et al (2015) A Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone and radiotherapy alone in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Ann Oncol 26:205–211CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Blanchard P, Lee A, Marguet S et al (2015) Chemotherapy and radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: an update of the MAC-NPC meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 16:645–655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Petrelli F, De Stefani A, Raspagliesi F, Lorusso D, Barni S (2014) Radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin-based doublet or weekly cisplatin for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol 134:166–171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Le Chevalier T (2010) Adjuvant chemotherapy for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer: where is it going? Ann Oncol 21:196–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vermorken JB, Remenar E, Herpen C van et al (2007) Cisplatin, fluorouracil, and docetaxel in unresectable head and neck cancer. New Engl J Med 357:1695–1704CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Loong HH, Chan AT (2014) Controversies in the systemic treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Oral Oncol 50:785–790CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lee AWM, Tung SY, Chua DTT et al (2010) Randomized trial of radiotherapy plus concurrent-adjuvant chemotherapy vs radiotherapy alone for regionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 102:1188–1198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kam MK, Leung SF, Zee B et al (2007) Prospective randomized study of intensity-modulated radiotherapy on salivary gland function in early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. J Clin Oncol 25:4873–4879CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fang FM, Tsai WL, Chen HC et al (2007) Intensity-modulated or conformal radiotherapy improves the quality of life of patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: comparisons of four radiotherapy techniques. Cancer 109:313–321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moon SH, Cho KH, Lee CG et al (2016) IMRT vs. 2D-radiotherapy or 3D-conformal radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma : Survival outcome in a Korean multi-institutional retrospective study (KROG 11-06. Strahlenther Onkol. (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yi-Yuan Dong
    • 1
    • 6
  • Chun Xiang
    • 2
  • Jian-Xun Lu
    • 3
  • Yi-Xin Su
    • 4
  • Yu-Fei Pan
    • 5
  • Rui Cai
    • 1
  • Rong-Jun Zhang
    • 1
  • Zhuo-Kai He
    • 1
  • Mei-Lian Liu
    • 1
  • Hui Huang
    • 1
  • Xue Bai
    • 1
  • Hua-Ying Tang
    • 1
  • Yun-Hua Shi
    • 1
  • Yan Wang
    • 1
  • Wei Jiang
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Radiation OncologyAffiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical UniversityGuilinPR China
  2. 2.Department of OtorhinolaryngologyNan Xishan HospitalGuilinPR China
  3. 3.Department of OncologyAffiliated Hospital of Youjiang Medical University for NationalitiesBaisePR China
  4. 4.Department of Radiation OncologyLingshan People’s HospitalLingshanPR China
  5. 5.Department of Radiation OncologyNan Xishan HospitalGuilinPR China
  6. 6.Department of OtorhinolaryngologyGuilin Medical University Affiliated HospitalGuilinPR China

Personalised recommendations