Establishing subdivisions of M1 stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma based on decision tree classification: A multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To meet the demand for personalized treatment, effective stratification of patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (mNPC) is essential. Hence, our study aimed to establish an M1 subdivision for prognostic prediction and treatment planning in patients with mNPC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 1239 patients with mNPC from three medical centers divided into the synchronous mNPC cohort (smNPC, n = 556) to establish an M1 stage subdivision and the metachronous mNPC cohort (mmNPC, n = 683) to validate this subdivision. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses identified covariates for the decision-tree model, proposing an M1 subdivision. Model performance was evaluated using time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves, Harrell's concordance index, calibration plots, and decision curve analyses. RESULTS: The proposed M1 subdivisions were M1a (≤5 metastatic lesions), M1b (>5 metastatic lesions + absent liver metastases), and M1c (>5 metastatic lesions + existing liver metastases) with median OS of 34, 22, and 13 months, respectively (p < 0.001). This M1 subdivision demonstrated superior discrimination (C-index = 0.698; 3-year AUC = 0.707) and clinical utility over those of existing staging systems. Calibration curves exhibited satisfactory agreement between predictions and actual observations. Internal and mmNPC cohort validation confirmed the robustness. Survival benefits from local metastatic treatment were observed in M1a, while immunotherapy improved survival in patients with M1b and M1c disease. CONCLUSION: This novel M1 staging strategy provides a refined approach for prognostic prediction and treatment planning in patients with mNPC, emphasizing the potential benefits of local and immunotherapeutic interventions based on individualized risk stratification.

First-line immunotherapy combinations for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: An updated network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Recently updated results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have confirmed that toripalimab, camrelizumab, and tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (TOGP, CAGP, and TIGP) significantly prolonged survival compared to placebo plus chemotherapy (PLGP) in the first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (R/M-NPC). However, the high cost of immunotherapies imposes a huge financial burden on patients and health care systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: RCTs estimating immunotherapies for R/M-NPC were searched. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was carried out; the main outcomes were hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The cost and efficacy of four first-line therapies were evaluated using the Markov model. The main outcome in the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs). The model robustness was assessed by one-way, three-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Three RCTs (JUPITER-02, CAPTAIN-1st, and RATIONALE-309) involving 815 patients were included in the NMA. Compared with PLGP, chemo-immunotherapies have significantly longer PFS and OS. Compared to the PLGP group, TOGP, CAGP, and TIGP groups resulted in additional costs of $48 339, $22 900, and $23 162, with additional 1.89, 0.73, and 0.960 QALYs, respectively, leading to the ICURs of $25 576/QALY, $31 370/QALY, and $31 729/QALY. Pairwise comparisons showed TOGP was the most cost-effective option among chemo-immunotherapy groups. CONCLUSION: From the Chinese payers' perspective, first-line immunotherapy combination therapies provided significant survival and cost-effectiveness superiority over chemotherapy alone for patients with R/M-NPC at the WTP of $38 029/QALY. Among the three chemo-immunotherapy groups, TOGP was the most cost-effective option.

Socioeconomic Status and Survival in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Population-Based Study.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate survival for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in relation to socioeconomic status. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Census Tract-level Socioeconomic Status Database (2000-2016). METHODS: Patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma diagnosed between 2000 and 2016 were identified. Data were stratified based on socioeconomic status, divided into three groups: group 1 being the poorest and group 3 the wealthiest. Univariate analysis as well as multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusted for individual variables was performed. RESULTS: A total of 5,527 patients were included in the study, with 33% in group 1, 34% in group 2, and 33% in group 3. There was a significant difference between groups in regard to age at diagnosis, race, histologic subtype, overall stage, tumor stage, nodal stage, and whether or not they received radiation. Patients in group 1, the poorest socioeconomic status, were more likely to be young (P = .003), black (P < .0001), present with higher overall stage (P = .009), tumor stage (P = .01), and nodal stage (P = .02), and less likely to receive radiation (P = .005). In multivariate analysis, there was a significant difference in survival between the groups, with group 1 patients less likely to survive compared to group 3 (hazard ratio = 1.28; 95% CI 1.07-1.57). CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the poorest socioeconomic status presented with more advanced nasopharyngeal cancer and were less likely to receive radiation when compared with individuals of higher socioeconomic status. The poorest socioeconomic status groups were less likely to survive from their disease when controlling for other variables. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 131:2719-2723, 2021.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of nimotuzumab for the radiotherapy of locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of nimotuzumab in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). METHODS: LA-NPC patients treated between October 2013 and December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. A well-balanced cohort of patients who received nimotuzumab in addition to standard treatment (n = 50) and patients who did not receive nimotuzumab (n = 100) was selected using propensity score-matching method (1:2 ratio) for the cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS: Compared with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) alone, addition of nimotuzumab to CCRT significantly improved the 3-year overall survival (OS) (98.00% vs. 91.00%, P = 0.032). On multivariate analysis, nimotuzumab (hazard ratio = 0.124, 95% confidence interval: 0.017-0.902, P = 0.039) showed prognostic significance for OS. No serious treatment-related adverse events were observed in the nimotuzumab group (P > 0.05). Cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that addition of nimotuzumab increased the average treatment costs by $14,364.63. The additional cost for every one percent increase in OS rate was $ 2,052.09. CONCLUSION: Addition of nimotuzumab to CCRT for LA-NPC confers significant survival benefits; however, it is not cost-effective.

An optimal posttreatment surveillance strategy for cancer survivors based on an individualized risk-based approach.

The optimal post-treatment surveillance strategy that can detect early recurrence of a cancer within limited visits remains unexplored. Here we adopt nasopharyngeal carcinoma as the study model to establish an approach to surveillance that balances the effectiveness of disease detection versus costs. A total of 7,043 newly-diagnosed patients are grouped according to a clinic-molecular risk grouping system. We use a random survival forest model to simulate the monthly probability of disease recurrence, and thereby establish risk-based surveillance arrangements that can maximize the efficacy of recurrence detection per visit. Markov decision-analytic models further validate that the risk-based surveillance outperforms the control strategies and is the most cost-effective. These results are confirmed in an external validation cohort. Finally, we recommend the risk-based surveillance arrangement which requires 10, 11, 13 and 14 visits for group I to IV. Our surveillance strategies might pave the way for individualized and economic surveillance for cancer survivors.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with nedaplatin versus cisplatin in stage II-IVB nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nedaplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy became an alternative doublet treatment strategy to cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with locoregional, advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a Markov model, we simulated patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma from disease-free to death. Input data for the model were collected from published literature and the standard fee database of West China Hospital. The outcome was expressed in quality-adjusted-years (QALYs), net monetary benefit at the threshold of $25,841, three times the Gross Domestic Product of China in 2017. The costs and benefits were discounted at 3% annually and a half-cycle correction was considered. The input parameters were varied in one-way sensitivity analysis to confirm the robustness of the model. All of the primary analyses used second-order probabilistic sensitivity analysis to capture the impact of parameter uncertainty based on 10,000 Monte-Carlo simulations. RESULTS: The mean QALYs of treatment in stage II-IVB nasopharyngeal carcinoma were comparable: 2.90 QALYs for nedaplatin and 3.12 QALYs for cisplatin. Nedaplatin cost $34,505 compared with $27,167 for cisplatin, generating an incremental net monetary benefit of nedaplatin versus cisplatin of $-13,357 at the ceiling ratio of $25,841. The results of nedaplatin remained cost-ineffective over the majority of the sensitivity analyses. The cost-effectiveness curve showed that the probability of strategies being cost-effective were 0% for nedaplatin and 100% for cisplatin in stage II-IVB nasopharyngeal carcinoma at any willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Nedaplatin is a dominated, cost-ineffective alternative to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage II-IVB nasopharyngeal carcinoma compared with cisplatin from the perspective of Chinese society.