International Journal of Clinical Oncology

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 240–246 | Cite as

A matched-pair comparison of intensity-modulated radiation therapy with cetuximab versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy with platinum-based chemotherapy for locally advanced head neck cancer

  • Jiayi Huang
  • Andrew M. Baschnagel
  • Peter Chen
  • Gregory Gustafson
  • Ishmael Jaiyesmi
  • Mitchell Folbe
  • Hong Ye
  • Jan Akervall
  • Daniel Krauss
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

We retrospectively compared the efficacy of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and cetuximab (IMRT/cetuximab) versus IMRT and platinum-based chemotherapy (IMRT/platinum) for locally advanced head neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC).

Methods

Thirty-one IMRT/cetuximab patients were matched 1:2 with 62 IMRT/platinum patients according to primary site and clinical stage. The primary endpoint was locoregional recurrence (LRR), and secondary endpoints included distant metastasis (DM), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS).

Results

Because of inherent selection bias, the IMRT/cetuximab cohort was significantly older and with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index. IMRT/cetuximab and IMRT/platinum did not have significantly different LRR and DM (33 vs. 23 % at 2 years, P = 0.22; 17 vs. 11 % at 2 years, P = 0.40; respectively). IMRT/cetuximab had significantly worse CSS and OS (67 vs. 84 %, P = 0.04; 58 vs. 83 %, P = 0.001; respectively). However, for the subset of elderly patients ≥65 years old, there is no difference between the two cohorts for all endpoints (all P = NS).

Conclusion

IMRT/platinum should remain the preferred choice of chemoradiotherapy for LAHNSCC, but IMRT/cetuximab may be a reasonable alternative for elderly patients.

Keywords

Head neck cancer Chemoradiotherapy, cetuximab Cisplatin IMRT 

References

  1. 1.
    Corvo R (2007) Evidence-based radiation oncology in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Radiother Oncol 85:156–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adelstein DJ, Li Y, Adams GL et al (2003) An intergroup phase III comparison of standard radiation therapy and two schedules of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable squamous cell head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol 21:92–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brizel DM, Albers ME, Fisher SR et al (1998) Hyperfractionated irradiation with or without concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 338:1798–1804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Denis F, Garaud P, Bardet E et al (2004) Final results of the 94–01 French Head and Neck Oncology and Radiotherapy Group randomized trial comparing radiotherapy alone with concomitant radiochemotherapy in advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 22:69–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Forastiere AA, Goepfert H, Maor M et al (2003) Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for organ preservation in advanced laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med 349:2091–2098PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J et al (2006) Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med 354:567–578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J et al (2010) Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer: 5-year survival data from a phase 3 randomised trial, and relation between cetuximab-induced rash and survival. Lancet Oncol 11:21–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ang KK, Zhang QE, Rosenthal DI et al (2011) A randomized phase III trial (RTOG 0522) of concurrent accelerated radiation plus cisplatin with or without cetuximab for stage III–IV head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNC) (abstract). J Clin Oncol 29(suppl):abstr 5500Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seiwert TY, Cohen EE (2005) State-of-the-art management of locally advanced head and neck cancer. Br J Cancer 92:1341–1348PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ang KK, Chen A, Curran WJ Jr et al (2012) Head and neck carcinoma in the United States: first comprehensive report of the Longitudinal Oncology Registry of Head and Neck Carcinoma (LORHAN). Cancer (Phila) 118:5783–5792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nutting CM, Morden JP, Harrington KJ et al (2011) Parotid-sparing intensity modulated versus conventional radiotherapy in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT): a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 12:127–136PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Caudell JJ, Sawrie SM, Spencer SA et al (2008) Locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer treated with primary radiotherapy: a comparison of the addition of cetuximab or chemotherapy and the impact of protocol treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71:676–681PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Koutcher L, Sherman E, Fury M et al (2011) Concurrent cisplatin and radiation versus cetuximab and radiation for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 81:915–922PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jeremic B, Shibamoto Y, Stanisavljevic B et al (1997) Radiation therapy alone or with concurrent low-dose daily either cisplatin or carboplatin in locally advanced unresectable squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a prospective randomized trial. Radiother Oncol 43:29–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kestin LL, Martinez AA, Stromberg JS et al (2000) Matched-pair analysis of conformal high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost versus external-beam radiation therapy alone for locally advanced prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 18:2869–2880PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL et al (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40:373–383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fu KK, Pajak TF, Trotti A et al (2000) A Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) phase III randomized study to compare hyperfractionation and two variants of accelerated fractionation to standard fractionation radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: first report of RTOG 9003. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48:7–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Walsh L, Gillham C, Dunne M et al (2011) Toxicity of cetuximab versus cisplatin concurrent with radiotherapy in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell cancer (LAHNSCC). Radiother Oncol 98:38–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Society of Clinical Oncology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiayi Huang
    • 1
  • Andrew M. Baschnagel
    • 2
  • Peter Chen
    • 2
  • Gregory Gustafson
    • 3
  • Ishmael Jaiyesmi
    • 4
  • Mitchell Folbe
    • 5
  • Hong Ye
    • 6
  • Jan Akervall
    • 7
  • Daniel Krauss
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Radiation OncologyWashington University School of Medicine in St. LouisSt. LouisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiation Oncology, William Beaumont HospitalOakland University William Beaumont School of MedicineRoyal OakUSA
  3. 3.Department of Radiation OncologyWilliam Beaumont HospitalTroyUSA
  4. 4.Division of Medical OncologyWilliam Beaumont HospitalRoyal OakUSA
  5. 5.Division of Medical OncologyWilliam Beaumont HospitalTroyUSA
  6. 6.Department of Radiation OncologyWilliam Beaumont HospitalRoyal OakUSA
  7. 7.Department of SurgeryWilliam Beaumont HospitalRoyal OakUSA

Personalised recommendations