Safety Results of a Phase III Randomized Trial of Comparison of Three Paclitaxel-Based Regimens Concurrent with Radiotherapy for Patients with Local Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (Eso-Shanghai 2)
D. Ai,J. Ye,Y. Chen,Q. Liu,X. Zheng,L. Yunhai,S. Wei,J. Li,Q. Lin,H. Luo,J. Cao,J. Zhou,G. Huang,M. Fan,K. Wu,H. Yang,Z. Zhu,W. Zhao,L. Li,K. Zhao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.06.2076
2020-01-01
Abstract:4564 Background: Paclitaxel (PTX) is effective in concurrent chemoradiation (CCR) against esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Which regimen, among cisplatin (DDP) (TP), carboplatin (CBP) (TC) or 5-Fu (TF) in combination with PTX concurrent with radiotherapy, provides best prognosis with minimum adverse events (AEs) is still unknown. Methods: The study compared two pairs of regimens: TF vs. TP and TF vs. TC concurrent with radiotherapy. Patients with histologically confirmed ESCC (clinical stage II, III or IVa) 20 were randomized into the three groups. Patients in TP group were treated with 2 cycles of CCR followed by 2 cycles of consolidation chemotherapy with TP (DDP 25 mg/m2/d, d1-3, PTX 175 mg/m2, d1, q28d). Patients in TF group were treated with 6 cycles of TF (5-Fu 300 mg/m2, civ 96h, PTX 50 mg/m2, d1, qw) in CCR followed by 2 cycles of TF (5-FU 1800 mg/m2, civ 72h, PTX 175 mg/m2, d1, q28d) in consolidation chemotherapy. Patients in TC group were treated with 6 cycles of TC (CBP AUC = 2, d1, PTX 50 mg/m2, d1, qw) in CCR followed by 2 cycles of TC (CBP AUC = 5, d1, PTX 175 mg/m2 d1, q28d) in consolidation chemotherapy. The radiotherapy dose in all groups was 61.2 Gy delivered in 34 fractions. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. Results: Between July 2015 and January 2018, 321 ESCC patients in 11 centers were enrolled. Median follow-up of patients who survived was 36.3 months (IQR 27.9–45.2). The 3-yr OS was 58.2% in TF group and 59.5% in both TP and TC group. (TF vs. TP, HR 0.935, 95% CI 0.627-1.417; TF vs. TC, HR 0.881, 95% CI 0.578-1.342; P = 0.839). No significant differences were found in 3-yr PFS between TF, TP and TC groups [48.3% vs. 45.5%(TP) or 48.3% (TC). P = 0.820]. TP group had a significant higher incidence of acute Grade 3/4 neutropenia [60.7% vs. 16.8%(TF) or 32.7%(TC)], thrombocytopenia [13.1% vs. 2.8%(TF) or 4.7%(TC)], anemia [5.6% vs. 1.9%(TF) or 3.7% (TC)], fatigue [10.3% vs. 1.9%(TF) or 0.9%(TC)] and vomiting [5.6% vs. 0%(TF) or 0.9%(TC))]than other two groups ( P< 0.05). TF group had a significant higher incidence of Grade 3/4/5 esophagitis [11.2% vs. 0.9%(TP) or 4.7%(TC))]and pneumonitis [4.6% vs. 0%(TP) or 1.9% (TC)]than other two groups ( P< 0.05). Conclusions: No statistical differences were found in OS and PFS among TF, TP and TC groups. TC might be an option used in CCR in ESCC patients with mild of side effects compared with other two groups, although it did not significantly prolong OS. Clinical trial information: NCT02459457 .