Induction Chemotherapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Single Institution Retrospective Review
C. Geno,D.K. Ebner,M. Neben Witt,S.C. Lester,D.M. Routman,M. Gamez,J.M. Wilson,K. Price,H. Fuentes,P.W. McGarrah,D.J. Ma
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.01.048
IF: 8.013
2024-04-01
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Abstract:Purpose/Objective(s) Head and neck cancers place healthy tissues in close proximity to tumor volumes, increasing toxicity risk. Induction chemotherapy (IC) allows pre-chemoradiotherapy cytoreduction. We hypothesized that treating patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) to the post-induction volume would decrease grade 3+ toxicity compared with the pre-induction volume. Materials/Methods All OPC patients treated with curative-intent radiotherapy (RT) 70 Gy in 35 fractions with or without chemotherapy between 2013 and 2022 were selected. The subgroup treated with IC was identified. Demographic, treatment, toxicity, and efficacy data were compiled through manual chart review. Statistical software was used for evaluating local control (LC), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) from date of initiation of treatment to date of last followup or death using the Kaplan-Meier method. For induction patients, plan review determined whether pre-chemotherapy or post-chemotherapy volumes were contoured. Results 262 patients were identified. 45 patients had received IC prior to RT. For the entire cohort, median age 62 years (range 40-88), 16% female, 62% ECOG 0 and 33% ECOG 1, 96% squamous, 73% HPV+, and 65% with past smoking history. <1% cT0, 12% cT1, 28% cT2, 24% cT3, 34% cT4; 15% cN0, 14% cN1, 64% cN2, 7% cN3, with 98% cM0. Patients who received IC had a higher numerical rate of cT4 (43 vs 33%, p=0.185) or cN3 disease (14% vs 5%, p=0.10) compared to the cohort who did not receive IC. Of the 45 patients who received IC, 97% received a platinum-taxane doublet and 40% also received 5-fluorouracil. Post-induction, 6 patients (11%) experienced complete response, 2 (4%) progressive disease, and 32 (58%) partial response; imaging was unavailable in the remainder. 78% of patients who received IC had a post-chemotherapy gross tumor volume (GTV) contoured. There was no detectable difference in grade 3+ toxicity between the patients who had IC followed by RT to pre-chemotherapy GTV vs. those with IC followed by RT to post-chemotherapy GTV (p=0.72). Patients who received IC prior to RT did not have improvement in LC, OS, or PFS compared with patients who were treated with RT alone without IC. Conclusion In this post-hoc retrospective single institution cohort, IC did not appear to change efficacy outcomes, consistent with published data. In patients treated with IC, there did not appear to be a difference in grade 3+ toxicity for patients who received RT to the post-chemotherapy GTV. Study limitations include small sample size, non-uniform IC regimens, and retrospective toxicity data collection. Larger prospective studies are needed to determine if post-IC GTV RT will result in decreased long-term toxicity.
oncology,radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging