Accelerated vs. conventionally fractionated adjuvant radiotherapy in high-risk head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis
Authors:
- Christiane MatuschekChristiane Matuschek
- Jan HaussmannJHJan Haussmann
- Edwin BölkeEBEdwin Bölke
- Stephan GrippSGStephan Gripp
- Patrick J. SchulerPSPatrick J. Schuler
- Bálint TamaskovicsBálint Tamaskovics
- Peter Arne GerberPGPeter Arne Gerber
- Freddy-Joel Djiepmo-NjanangFDFreddy-Joel Djiepmo-Njanang
- Kai KammersKKKai Kammers
- Christian PlettenbergCPChristian Plettenberg
- Bahar AnooshahrBABahar Anooshahr
Open Access
- 4 October 2018
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in Radiation Oncology
- Vol. 13 (1) , 195
Abstract
Adjuvant radiotherapy in advanced head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) reduces the risk of local-regional failure and most likely increases the survival rate. Patients at high risk for tumor recurrence may benefit from more aggressive altered fractionation schedules in order to reduce the overall time from surgery to completion of radiotherapy. Here, we reviewed the results of six randomized trials addressing the above hypothesis. In the six trials of interest, a total of 988 patients with locally advanced HNSCC were randomly assigned to receive either accelerated or conventionally fractionated adjuvant radiotherapy. Hazard ratios (HR) were extracted from available publications for local-regional control, distant metastasis as well as overall-, cancer specific- and disease-free survival. Meta-analysis of the effect sizes was performed using fixed and random effect models. Acute and late side effects were categorized and summarized for comparison. Accelerated radiotherapy did not improve the loco-regional control (n = 988, HR = 0.740, CI = 0.48–1.13, p = 0.162), progression-free survival (HR = 0.89, CI = 0.76–1.04, p = 0.132) or overall survival (HR = 0.88, CI = 0.75–1.04, p = 0.148) significantly. Acute confluent mucositis occurred with significant higher frequency with accelerated radiotherapy. Late side effects did not differ significantly in either group. Accelerated radiotherapy does not result in a significant improvement of loco-regional control or overall survival in high-risk patients. Acute but not late radiation toxicity were more frequent with the accelerated RT technique. In clinical practice accelerated postoperative radiation therapy might be a suitable option only for a subset of patients.Keywords
This publication has 36 references indexed in Scilit:
- Concomitant chemoradiotherapy versus acceleration of radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy in locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (GORTEC 99-02): an open-label phase 3 randomised trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2012
- Monte Carlo radiotherapy simulations of accelerated repopulation and reoxygenation for hypoxic head and neck cancerBritish Journal of Radiology, 2011
- Parotid-sparing intensity modulated versus conventional radiotherapy in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT): a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2011
- Randomized clinical trial on 7-days-a-week postoperative radiotherapy for high-risk squamous cell head and neck cancerRadiotherapy and Oncology, 2008
- Hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer: a meta-analysisThe Lancet, 2006
- Randomized clinical trial on continuous 7-days-a-week postoperative radiotherapy for high-risk squamous cell head-and-neck cancer: A report on acute normal tissue reactionsRadiotherapy and Oncology, 2005
- Defining risk levels in locally advanced head and neck cancers: A comparative analysis of concurrent postoperative radiation plus chemotherapy trials of the EORTC (#22931) and RTOG (# 9501)Head & Neck, 2005
- Postoperative Concurrent Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy for High-Risk Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and NeckNew England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- Postoperative Irradiation with or without Concomitant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Head and Neck CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- How fast is repopulation of tumor cells during the treatment gap?International Journal of Radiation Oncology - Biology - Physics (IJROBP), 2002