1 / 38

Statements on Head and Neck Cancer 2006 Primary Radiochemotherapy

Statements on Head and Neck Cancer 2006 Primary Radiochemotherapy. Arlene A. Forastiere, M.D. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Department of Oncology. Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy as Standard of Care Based on Phase III Trials. Organ Preservation Randomized Trials

livia
Download Presentation

Statements on Head and Neck Cancer 2006 Primary Radiochemotherapy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Statements on Head and Neck Cancer 2006Primary Radiochemotherapy Arlene A. Forastiere, M.D. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Department of Oncology

  2. Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy as Standard of Care Based on Phase III Trials • Organ Preservation Randomized Trials • Larynx INT R91-11 • OropharynxGORTEC • Nasopharynx Trials in US & Asia • Unresectable diseaseTrials in US & Europe • Post-operative adjuvantEORTC & US trials

  3. Standard of Care Options to Preserve the Larynx for locally advanced disease • Conservation laryngeal surgery • Concurrent RT and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 x 3 • RT alone

  4. VA Laryngeal Cancer Study Group Induction CF - RT versus Surgery + RT NEJM 1991;324:1685-1690 • No difference in survival • Larynx preserved in 64%; 2-year LFS rate 41% • Pattern of failure (CT v S) • local, 12% v 2% • distant, 11% v 17% • Risk factors for surgery • T4 or N2-3 • 56% of T4 eventually required laryngectomy

  5. INT R91-11 Trial to Preserve the LarynxForastiere AA. NEJM 349:2091, 2003 CR, PR cisplatin/5-FU RT surgery RT • Cisplatin/5-FU* • x 2 • Radiotherapy + cisplatin 100 mg/m2 x 3 • Radiotherapy • RT 70 Gy/7 wks, 2 Gy/fx *cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 5-FU 1000 mg/m2 CIVI days 1-5 NR

  6. Eligibility Criteria • Resectable SCC of the glottis or supraglottis requiring total laryngectomy • Stage III or IV T1 excluded T4 excluded if tumor penetrated through cartilage or invaded > 1cm into base of tongue • No distant metastases

  7. Surgery • Planned neck dissection • N2 or N3 at initial staging • Total laryngectomy • Inadequate response (<PR) of primary to induction chemotherapy • Biopsy proven disease after completing RT • Laryngeal dysfunction or necrosis

  8. Patient Characteristics, in %

  9. INT R91-11 Results: Larynx Preservation Intergroup R91-11: 43% absolute reduction in laryngectomy rate with RT/cisplatin No difference in survival (76% at 2-years)

  10. Induction Concurrent RT alone Local-regional control 78% 61% 56% Induction vs Concurrent p =0.0031 Induction vs RT alone p= 0.16 Concurrent vs RT alone p= 0.00002

  11. Induction Concurrent RT alone Disease-free survival Laryngectomy-free survival 66% 61% 59% 52% 53% 44% I + RT vs CRT p= 0.49 I + RT vs RT p= 0.08 CRT vs RT p= 0.01 I + RT vs CRT p= 0.64 I + RT vs RT p= 0.017 CRT vs RT p= 0.0053

  12. Response and compliance after two cycles of induction chemotherapy • CR 21%, PR 64%, total 85% • 24 (15%) < PR • 29% had laryngectomy per protocol • 25% other chemo or unknown rx • 46% had RT with/without third cycle of CT; • all achieved CR post XRT, one failed later

  13. ResultsForastiere AA. N Eng J Med 349:2091, 2003Weber RS. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 129:44, 2003 • Chemotherapy suppressed metastasis • Concurrent 8% vs RT 16% • Chemotherapy added toxicity • Gr 3-4 toxicity: chemotherapy 81%, 82% vs RT 61% • Laryngectomy was required in 25% of all patients (16% chemorad, 28% induction, 32% RT alone)

  14. Function and QOL Assessments: no difference in speech at 12 and 24 mos Moderate impairment: unable to be understood on the telephone or worse

  15. Swallowing function at 12 mos: delay in recovery with concurrent treatment No differences between treatment groups at 24 mos

  16. 5-Year Update (ASCO 2006) • Confirms the 2-year analysis • Survival – no significant difference • Function excellent – no significant difference • Concurrent CRT is significantly better than RT alone for all endpoints except OS • Induction was not better than RT alone for larynx preservation and LR control • Concurrent CRT and induction were better than RT alone for laryngectomy-free survival and DFS

  17. 5-year Update Analysis not yet complete • Late effects • Site of first failure • Cause of death

  18. Implications for Patient Management • For larynx preservation of T3 and low volume T4 disease, chemotherapy and RT should be given concurrently • For high volume T4 disease • Glottic cancer or penetration through cartilage into soft tissues: surgery • Supraglottic cancer: option for concurrent chemoradiotherapy .

  19. Implications for Patient Management • RT alone for patients unable to tolerate the added toxicity of concurrent chemoradiotherapy • No role for induction chemotherapy outside of a clinical trial

  20. Concepts in Development Separate intermediate and advanced stages: improved survival as primary endpoint • RT (altered fx or std) + biologic • Inhibitors of EGFR or angiogenesis • Standard fx RT + cisplatin + biologic • Induction followed by cisplatin/RT

  21. Other Questions • Alternative chemotherapy regimens • Impact of changing epidemiology (human papilloma virus) and prevalence of oropharynx cancer • Patient selection or therapeutic effect?

  22. ECOG 2399: Schema Primary endpoints: organ preservation rate, toxicity, assess utility of organ function instruments Median follow-up 33 months (11.8 months – 47 months)

  23. TREATMENT DELIVERY (FEASIBILTY) Larynx (36) Oropharynx (69) Overall (105) # Induction Cyclesunknown 0 2 (4%) 2 (3%) 1 0 3(4%) 3(3%) 2 36 (100%) 64 (93%) 100 (95%) #Concurrent Cycles unknown 0 3 (3%) 3 (3%) 0 5 (14%) 7 (10%) 12 (12%) 4 0 7 (10%) 7 (7%) 5 4 (11%) 10 (15%) 14 (13%) 6 6 (17%) 86% 18 (26%) 24 (23%) 7 21 (58%) 24 (25%) 45 (43%) 5, 6, or 7 cycles 83 (79%) Radiation (≥66Gy) 31 59 90 (87%)

  24. SURGICAL INTERVENTIONS Larynx (n=36)Oro (n=69)Overall (n=105) Neck Dissection Only 11 (31%) 18 (26%) 29 (28%) Primary Site Only 7 (19%) 6 (9%) 13 (13%) Both 5 (14%) 6 (9%) 11 (11%) Primary Overall 12 (33%) 12 (18%) 24 (23%)

  25. Overall Survival by Primary Site 1.0 p=0.06 0.8 80% 58% 0.6 Survival Probability 0.4 Oropharynx 0.2 Larynx 0.0 0 10 20 30 40 Survival Time in Months

  26. CONCLUSIONS • Feasible regimen to deliver • Surgical salvage rate for larynx cancer, 33% suggests: • that weekly paclitaxel concurrent with RT is not effective for LR control • Induction chemotherapy does not impact LR control or allow for a less intense concurrent chemoRT regimen • DFS and OS results are excellent for OP (probable impact of HPV?) • ASCO update in 2006

  27. R99-14: Concomitant Boost RT + Concurrent Cisplatin • 72 Gy/42 fx over 6 wks (daily for 3.5 wks then bid for 2.5 wks) + cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 & 22 • 76 analyzable pts • Median age 57 (range 40-76) • Stage IV 88%; T3-4 64%, N2-3 78% • Oral cavity 9 (12%) • Oropharynx 50 (66%) • Hypopharynx 8 (11%) • Larynx 9 (12%)

  28. Overall survival, disease-free survival and relapse pattern Ang, K. K. et al. J Clin Oncol; 23:3008-3015 2005

  29. Cumulative incidence of all treatment-related late grade 3 to 5 and grade 4 to 5 toxicity Late Toxicity Ang, K. K. et al. J Clin Oncol; 23:3008-3015 2005

  30. R97-03: Randomized Ph II Concurrent Chemradiation • RT – 70 Gy/35 fx • Chemotherapy • Arm 1: cisplatin 10 mg/m2 + 5-FU 400 mg/m2/dduring last 10 days of RT • Arm 2: hydroxyurea + 5-FU + RT every other week (U. Chicago FHX) • Arm 3: cisplatin 20 mg/m2 + paclitaxel 30 mg/m2 weekly

  31. R97-03: Randomized Phase II Concurrent Chemradiation • 231 eligible pts randomized • Median age 56 (range 21-83) • T3-4 75%; N2-3 70% • Primary site • Oral cavity 16% • Oropharynx 67% • Hypopharynx 17%

  32. Time to locoregional failure Estimated 2-yr LR failure rate 41% 27.5% Garden, A.S. J Clin Oncol 22:2856-2864, 2004

  33. R97-03: Disease-free Survival Estimated 2-yr DFS 51% 49% 38% Garden, A.S. J Clin Oncol; 22:2856-2864, 2004

  34. R97-03: Overall survival 2-yr rate 57% 69% 67% ( R91-14: 2-yr survival 72% )

  35. Randomized trials needed • RTOG H0129 Stage III/IV OC, OP, HP & Lx Accelerated fx/concomitant boost + cisplatin x 2 versus Standard fractionation + cisplatin x 3 • RTOG H0522 Stage III/IV OC, OP, HP & Lx • Accelerated fx/comcomitant boost + cisplatin 100 mg/m2 x 2 +/- cetuximab

  36. E1303: Non-operative rx for resectable patients (E2399 replacement) Induction paclitaxel + carboplatin + C225 (PCC) concurrent PCC + RT 70 Gy • Response assessment after induction and 50 Gy, surgery if < pCR after 50 Gy • Endpoints: 90% disease-free at completion of treatment

  37. Phase II trial of C225 with RT and cisplatin in unresectable patients • E3303: RT 70 Gy + C225 weekly + cisplatin 75 mg/m² days 1, 22 & 43 CR, PR, SD continue C225 for 6 mos • Rationale: INT E1392 – improved 3-yr survival with RT/CDDP ( 37% vs 23%) • Endpoints: PFS and survival, toxicity, molecular correlates • Accrual: 68 pts to increase 2-yr PFS (35% to 50%)

  38. Chemoradiotherapy • Mixed site trials are useful for hypothesis generation and feasibility testing • Efficacy for local-regional control may differ by primary site mandating site-specific trials • e.g. HPV related oropharynx cancer • Alternative concurrent chemotherapy regimens to cisplatin 100 mg/m2 or PF should not be assumed to have equivalent efficacy

More Related