Induction chemotherapy with lobaplatin and fluorouracil versus cisplatin and fluorouracil followed by chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage III-IVB nasopharyngeal carcinoma: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin-based induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma has been recommended in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines. However, cisplatin is associated with poor patient compliance and has notable side-effects. Lobaplatin, a third-generation platinum drug, has shown promising antitumour activity against several malignancies with less toxicity. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of lobaplatin-based induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy over a cisplatin-based regimen in patients with locoregional, advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. METHODS: In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at five hospitals in China, patients aged 18-60 years with previously untreated, non-keratinising stage III-IVB nasopharyngeal carcinoma; Karnofsky performance-status score of at least 70; and adequate haematological, renal, and hepatic function were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenously either lobaplatin-based (lobaplatin 30 mg/m2 on days 1 and 22, and fluorouracil 800 mg/m2 on days 1-5 and 22-26 for two cycles) or cisplatin-based (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 22, and fluorouracil 800 mg/m2 on days 1-5 and 22-26 for two cycles) induction chemotherapy, followed by concurrent lobaplatin-based (two cycles of intravenous lobaplatin 30 mg/m2 every 3 weeks plus intensity-modulated radiotherapy) or cisplatin-based (two cycles of intravenous cisplatin 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks plus intensity-modulated radiotherapy) chemoradiotherapy. Total radiation doses of 68-70 Gy (for the sum of the volumes of the primary tumour and enlarged retropharyngeal nodes), 62-68 Gy (for the volume of clinically involved gross cervical lymph nodes), 60 Gy (for the high-risk target volume), and 54 Gy (for the low-risk target volume), were administered in 30-32 fractions, 5 days per week. Randomisation was done centrally at the clinical trial centre of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Centre by means of computer-generated random number allocation with a block design (block size of four) stratified according to disease stage and treatment centre. Treatment assignment was known to both clinicians and patients. The primary endpoint was 5-year progression-free survival, analysed in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. If the upper limit of the 95% CI for the difference in 5-year progression-free survival between the lobaplatin-based and cisplatin-based groups did not exceed 10%, non-inferiority was met. Adverse events were analysed in all patients who received at least one cycle of induction chemotherapy. This trial is registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-TRC-13003285 and is closed. FINDINGS: From June 7, 2013, to June 16, 2015, 515 patients were assessed for eligibility and 502 patients were enrolled: 252 were randomly assigned to the lobaplatin-based group and 250 to the cisplatin-based group. After a median follow-up of 75·3 months (IQR 69·9-81·1) in the intention-to-treat population, 5-year progression-free survival was 75·0% (95% CI 69·7-80·3) in the lobaplatin-based group and 75·5% (70·0 to 81·0) in the cisplatin-based group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·98, 95% CI 0·69-1·39; log-rank p=0·92), with a difference of 0·5% (95% CI -7·1 to 8·1; pnon-inferiority=0·0070). In the per-protocol population, the 5-year progression-free survival was 74·8% (95% CI 69·3 to 80·3) in the lobaplatin-based group and 76·4% (70·9 to 81·9) in the cisplatin-based group (HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·73 to 1·49; log-rank p=0·83), with a difference of 1·6% (-6·1 to 9·3; pnon-inferiority=0·016). 63 (25%) of 252 patients in the lobaplatin-based group and 63 (25%) of 250 patients in the cisplatin-based group had a progression-free survival event in the intention-to-treat population; 62 (25%) of 246 patients in the lobaplatin-based group and 58 (25%) of 237 patients in the cisplatin-based group had a progression-free survival event in the per-protocol population. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were mucositis (102 [41%] of 252 in the lobaplatin-based group vs 99 [40%] of 249 in the cisplatin-based group), leucopenia (39 [16%] vs 56 [23%]), and neutropenia (25 [10%] vs 59 [24%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Lobaplatin-based induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy resulted in non-inferior survival and fewer toxic effects than cisplatin-based therapy. The results of our trial indicate that lobaplatin-based induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy might be a promising alternative regimen to cisplatin-based treatment in patients with locoregional, advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. FUNDING: National Science and Technology Pillar Program, International Cooperation Project of Science and Technology Program of Guangdong Province, Planned Science and Technology Project of Guangdong Province, and Cultivation Foundation for the Junior Teachers at Sun Yat-sen University. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a retrospective controlled study.

BACKGROUND: In the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is under-evaluated. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of NAC plus IMRT and concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) plus adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) on locoregionally advanced NPC. METHODS: Between January 2004 and December 2008, 240 cases of locoregionally advanced NPC confirmed by pathologic assessment in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center were reviewed. Of the 240 patients, 117 received NAC followed by IMRT, and 123 were treated with CCRT plus AC. The NAC + IMRT group received a regimen that included cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). The CCRT + AC group received cisplatin concurrently with radiotherapy, and subsequently received adjuvant cisplatin and 5-FU. The survival rates were assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis, and the survival curves were compared using a log-rank test. Multivariate analysis was conducted using the Cox proportional hazard regression model. RESULTS: The 5-year overall survival (OS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were 78.0, 87.9, 79.0, and 69.8%, respectively, for the NAC + IMRT group and 78.7, 84.8, 76.2, and 65.6%, respectively, for the CCRT + AC group. There were no significant differences in survival between the two groups. In multivariate analysis, age (<50 years vs. ≥50 years) and overall stage (III vs. IV) were found to be independent predictors for OS and DFS; furthermore, the overall stage was a significant prognostic factor for DMFS. Compared with the CCRT + AC protocol, the NAC + IMRT protocol significantly reduced the occurrence rates of grade 3-4 nausea-vomiting (6.5 vs. 1.5%, P = 0.023) and leukopenia (9.7 vs. 0.8%, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment outcomes of the NAC + IMRT and CCRT + AC groups were similar. Distant metastasis remained the predominant mode of treatment failure.