Cargando…
Comparison of long-term survival and toxicity of simultaneous integrated boost vs conventional fractionation with intensity-modulated radiotherapy for the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma
AIM: In recent years, the intensity-modulated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy with conventional fractionation (IMRT-CF) have been involved in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). However, the potential clinical effects and t...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4821392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27099518 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S99403 |
Sumario: | AIM: In recent years, the intensity-modulated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy with conventional fractionation (IMRT-CF) have been involved in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). However, the potential clinical effects and toxicities are still controversial. METHODS: Here, 107 patients with biopsy-proven locally advanced NPC between March 2004 and January 2011 were enrolled in the retrospective study. Among them, 54 patients received IMRT-SIB, and 53 patients received IMRT-CF. Subsequently, overall survival (OS), 5-year progression-free survival (PFS), 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and relevant toxicities were analyzed. RESULTS: In the present study, all patients completed the treatment, and the overall median follow-up time was 80 months (range: 8–126 months). The 5-year OS analysis revealed no significant difference between the IMRT-SIB and IMRT-CF groups (80.9% vs 80.5%, P=0.568). In addition, there were also no significant between-group differences in 5-year PFS (73.3% vs 74.4%, P=0.773) and 5-year LRFS (88.1% vs 90.8%, P=0.903). Notably, the dose to critical organs (spinal cord, brainstem, and parotid gland) in patients treated by IMRT-CF was significantly lower than that in patients treated by IMRT-SIB (all P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Both IMRT-SIB and IMRT-CF techniques are effective in treating locally advanced NPC, with similar OS, PFS, and LRFS. However, IMRT-CF has more advantages than IMRT-SIB in protecting spinal cord, brainstem, and parotid gland from acute and late toxicities, such as xerostomia. Further prospective study is warranted to confirm our findings. |
---|