Combined chemotherapy and radiation versus radiation alone in the management of localized angiocentric lymphoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To clarify the clinical benefit derived from the combined modality therapy (CMT) comprised of chemotherapy and involved-field radiotherapy (XRT) for stage I and II angiocentric lymphomas of the head and neck. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Of 143 patients with angiocentric lymphoma of the head and neck treated at the Yonsei Cancer Center between 1976 and 1995, 104 patients (XRT group) received involved-field XRT alone with a median dose of 50.4 Gy (range: 20-70 Gy), while 39 patients (CMT group) received a median three cycles (range: 1-6 cycles) of chemotherapy before starting involved-field XRT. The response rate, patterns of failure, complications, and survival data of the XRT group were compared with those of the CMT group. RESULTS: Despite a higher response rate, local failure was the most common pattern of failure in patients of the both groups. The patterns of failure, including the systemic relapse rate were not influenced by the addition of combination chemotherapy. Although both modalities were well tolerated by the majority of patients, aberrant immunologic disorders or medical illnesses, such as a hemophagocytic syndrome, sepsis, intractable hemorrhage, or the evolution of second primary malignancies were more frequently observed in patients of the CMT group. The prognosis of patients in the XRT group was relatively poor, with a 5-year overall actuarial survival rate of 38% and disease-free survival rate of 32%, respectively. However, their clinical outcome was not altered by the addition of systemic chemotherapy. Achieving complete remission was the most important prognostic factor on univariate and multivariate analyses, but treatment modality was not found to be a prognostic variable influencing survival. CONCLUSIONS: Involved-field XRT alone for angiocentric lymphoma of the head and neck was insufficient to achieve an improved survival rate, but the combination of chemotherapy and involved-field XRT failed to demonstrate any therapeutic advantage over involved-field XRT alone.

Effect of low-dose irradiation on induction of an apoptotic adaptive response in the murine system.

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of low doses of irradiation on the induction of an apoptotic adaptive response in the murine system using C3H/HeJ mice bearing 8 mm syngeneic tumors, HCa-I and OCa-I. In OCa-I, the 0.05 Gy priming dose significantly reduced the 25 Gy-induced apoptosis by 30%, whereas this reduction was not seen in HCa-I. The analysis of apoptosis-regulating molecules showed that the application of a priming dose increased the radiation-induced p53 level in both tumors. No other regulators changed in OCa-I. However, in HCa-I, the application of a priming dose increased radiation-induced Bcl-XL and Bcl-XS, but not Bcl-2 or Bax. An apoptotic adaptive response induced by low-dose radiation was shown in one murine tumor, OCa-I and Bcl-XL and Bcl-XS appeared to be implicated.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation for inoperable carcinoma of the maxillary antrum: a matched-control study.

A matched-control study comparing standard radiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation was undertaken to clarify the effects of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the maxillary antrum. Thirty-four patients with inoperable maxillary cancer were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (Group II). Before starting radiotherapy, all patients in Group II received two or three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisting of cisplatin and a 5-day continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil with or without intravenous injection of vinblastine. Radiation doses ranged from 66 Gy to 75 Gy (median, 70 Gy). The response rate, patterns of failure, toxicity, and survival for Group II were compared with those for 34 stage-matched patients treated with radiation alone (Group I). Despite a higher response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the recurrence rate and patterns of treatment failure were not influenced by the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In most cases, neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not interfere with subsequent radiotherapy, and radiation-induced late complications occurred equally in both treatment groups. After a median follow-up of 48 months, there was no significant difference in 5-year actuarial survival or disease-free survival between the two treatment groups. Radiation alone for inoperable maxillary cancer was clearly suboptimal for improving local control and survival rate, but neoadjuvant chemotherapy in addition to standard radiotherapy failed to demonstrate any therapeutic advantage over radiation alone.