Clinical Cancer Research Molecular Diagnostics in Cancer Therapeutic Development: Fulfilling the Promise of Personalized Medicine Infection and Cancer: Biology, Therapeutics, and Prevention
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, F. R.
Right arrow Articles by Vokes, E. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, F. R.
Right arrow Articles by Vokes, E. E.
Clinical Cancer Research Vol. 9, 1689-1697, May 2003
© 2003 American Association for Cancer Research


Clinical Trials

Multicenter Randomized Phase II Study of Paclitaxel (1-Hour Infusion), Fluorouracil, Hydroxyurea, and Concomitant Twice Daily Radiation with or without Erythropoietin for Advanced Head and Neck Cancer

Fred R. Rosen, Daniel J. Haraf, Merrill S. Kies, Kerstin Stenson, Louis Portugal, Marcy A. List, Bruce E. Brockstein, Bharat B. Mittal, Alfred W. Rademaker, Mary Ellyn Witt, Harold Pelzer, Ralph R. Weichselbaum and Everett E. Vokes2

Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology/Oncology [F.R.R.], Department of Radiation Oncology, and Department of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery [L.P.], University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; Departments of Medicine [M.S.K.], Radiation Oncology [B.B.M.], and Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery [H.P.] and the Cancer Research Center [A.W.R.], Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology/Oncology [B.E.B., E.E.V.], Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology [D.J.H., M.E.W., R.R.W., E.E.V.], Section of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery [K.S.], Center [M.A.L.], University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois


    ABSTRACT
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 PATIENTS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Purpose: To expand on our experience with the combination of paclitaxel, fluorouracil, hydroxyurea, and twice daily irradiation (T-FHX) and to assess the impact of weekly administration of erythropoietin (r-HuEpo) on transfusion requirements, we conducted a Phase II multi-institutional trial with a simplified 1-h paclitaxel infusion schedule and randomized patients to receive weekly doses of r-HuEpo.

Patients and Methods: A total of 90 patients with locally advanced head and neck cancers (stage IV, 96%; N2/N3, 66%) were treated on a regimen of 1-h infusion of paclitaxel (100 mg/m2/day, day 1), 120-h infusion of 5-fluorouracil (600 mg/m2/day, days 0–5); hydroxyurea 500 mg p.o. every 12 h for 11 doses; and radiation 150cGy bid, days 1–5 of each 14-day cycle repeated for five cycles over 10 weeks (7200–7500 cGy). Before initiating therapy, patients were randomized to receive r-HuEpo 40,000 IU s.c. once weekly.

Results: At median follow-up of 40 months, 3-year progression-free survival is 62%, locoregional control is 84%, and systemic control is 79%. Overall survival is 59%. Anemia, leucopenia, dermatitis, and mucositis were the most frequent grade 3 or 4 toxicities. Patients randomized to erythropoietin experienced less grade 2/3 anemia (52 versus 77%; P = 0.02), but transfusion requirements were not significantly different.

Conclusions: T-FHX is an active and tolerable regimen inducing local tumor control and promising survival with organ preservation in high-risk patients. One h infusion of paclitaxel simplified the regimen without compromising efficacy. Addition of erythropoietin does not reduce the need for transfusion with this nonplatinum-containing regimen. T-FHX should be advanced to a randomized trial and compared with a cisplatin-based concomitant regimen.


    INTRODUCTION
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 PATIENTS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Concomitant chemoradiotherapy has proven superior to radiation therapy alone in recent meta-analyses and several recently published randomized studies in advanced, unresectable head and neck cancer (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) . At the University of Chicago and subsequently in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, the combination of two radiopotentiating agents, FHX3 , given concomitantly on a week on/week off schedule with radiotherapy has succeeded in maximizing locoregional control and achieving organ preservation in advanced head and neck cancer (6 , 7) . The regimen has been intensified in subsequent trials by the addition of a third agent, C-FHX, or continuous infusion T-FHX (Taxol, Bristol, New Jersey) and the use of twice daily radiation, resulting in high locoregional control and survival rates with severe but manageable toxicity (8 , 9) .

There is evidence suggesting that cytotoxicity of radiation is dependent on good oxygenation of the target tumor tissue and that anemia before or during chemoradiotherapy could have a negative impact on response and survival (10) . Treatment options for chemotherapy-related anemia are red cell transfusions and/or the administration of r-HuEpo (11) . The current study builds on a previous Phase I trial (12) and replaces the 120-h continuous infusion paclitaxel in T-FHX with a 1-h infusion of the same total dose on day 1 of each cycle in an attempt to ease its administration. The complete response rate, toxicity, and disease-free and overall survival were the primary objectives of this Phase II trial. Patients were also randomized to receive r-HuEpo with the objective of maintaining baseline hemoglobin levels or increase hemoglobin during chemoradiation and prevent or reduce transfusion requirements. To achieve this objective the number of transfusions required to maintain a hemoglobin of at least 10 throughout all treatment cycles, and mean hematocrit values were compared in each group.


    PATIENTS AND METHODS
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 PATIENTS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The study opened in March 1997 and closed to patient accrual in March 1999. Patients were entered at five participating institutions; The University of Chicago; University of Illinois at Chicago; Northwestern University; Michael Reese Hospital; and Weiss Memorial Hospital. Eligible patients had locoregionally advanced stage IV carcinoma of the head and neck arising from the oral cavity, pharynx (including nasopharynx, oral pharynx, and hypopharynx), and larynx. Patients with stage III disease were eligible only if primary site included the base of tongue or hypopharynx. All therapy was given with curative intent. Before study entry patients were evaluated by a multidisciplinary team composed of the attending surgeon, a radiation oncologist, and medical oncologist. The timing and feasibility of surgery were determined on each patient before initiation of therapy. All patients were required to have histological or cytological confirmation of squamous cell carcinoma, mucoepidermoid carcinoma, or lymphoepithelioma. The presence of distant metastases (M1) conferred ineligibility. Measurable disease was not required but was carefully documented when present. Patients had not received prior chemotherapy or radiotherapy and had Karnofsky performance status >= 60%. Baseline laboratory requirements included an absolute neutrophil count >= 1500 cells/µl; platelet count >= 100,000/µl, and hemoglobin <= 16 g/dl. Initial staging procedures consisted of a history and physical, panendoscopy and biopsy with tumor measurements, dental evaluation, head and neck and chest CT scans, bone scan, barium swallow; quality of life; and speech and swallowing assessment. Placement of a feeding device was recommended. Patients with sensitivity to cremaphor EL, human albumin or mammalian, or Escherichia coli-derived proteins were excluded. All patients signed institutional review board-approved informed consent forms.

Surgery.
Decisions as to the timing and advisability of surgery were made on an individual basis. A general goal of the protocol was to obtain organ preservation. Most often, patients underwent chemotherapy and radiation as planned primary therapy. Simple excision of the primary lesion was allowed as the initial treatment. The extent of surgery varied, and it ranged from laser resection or wide excisional biopsy to resection of an oral cavity or tonsillar primary. Modified neck dissection could also be performed. Salvage surgery was recommended for residual disease at the primary site or neck after completion of chemoradiotherapy. For patients initially staged as N2 or N3, modified neck resection also was recommended, even in the absence of overt residual tumor. Surgery at the primary site was omitted in patients who achieved complete remission confirmed by physical examination, radiographic imaging, and/or a negative biopsy.

Chemotherapy and Radiation.
Before initiating therapy, patients were randomized to receive or not receive r-HuEpo (Procrit; Ortho-Biotech, New York) during chemoradiotherapy. All patients were admitted to the inpatient unit and treatment started on day 0 (usually Sunday evenings) with hydroxyurea administered at 500 mg p.o. every 12 h for 11 doses. The first daily dose of hydroxyurea on days 1 through 5 was given 2 h before the first fraction of daily radiotherapy. Continuous infusion 5FU was also started day 0 in the evening at 600 mg/m2 and continued for 5 days (120 h). Paclitaxel was administered i.v. over 1 h at 100 mg/m2 on day 1 after the first dose of radiation. Premedication for paclitaxel included dexamethasone 10 mg p.o. at 12 h and 1 h before paclitaxel and benadryl 25 mg i.v. push 30 min before paclitaxel. Radiation therapy was administered twice daily with a minimum of 6 h between fractions at 1.5 Gy/fraction with concomitant chemoradiotherapy during days 1 through 5 (total dosage 15 Gy/cycle). No chemoradiotherapy was administered on days 6 through 13; cycles were administered every other week. For patients randomized to r-HuEpo (Procrit; Ortho Biotech) 40,000 IU was administered once weekly for 14 weeks, starting with the first treatment week of cycle 1 and continued for 4 weeks after treatment finished. Patients randomized to r-HuEpo also received concomitant oral iron therapy (ferrous sulfate 325 mg three times daily) beginning day 1 and continued throughout administration of Procrit (Fig. 1)Citation .



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Treatment regimen. T-FHX chemoradiotherapy regimen administered every other week.

 
All patients with a hemoglobin < 10 g/dl at baseline were transfused packed RBCs, generally 2 units (or more if necessary) to achieve a minimum hemoglobin of 10 g/dl before the start of therapy. Patients were also transfused packed RBCs if hemoglobin was < 10 on days 0–5 of any cycle of chemoradiotherapy.

Treatment cycles were not postponed for mucositis, dermatitis, or diarrhea. For grade 4 mucositis, dermatitis, or diarrhea exceeding 7 days duration or that persisted on day 1 of a subsequent cycle, 5FU was decreased to 500 mg/m2/day and paclitaxel decreased to 75% of the calculated dose. For WBC count of 1000–1999 cells/µl or platelet count of 50,000–74,999 cells/µl, paclitaxel was decreased 75% of the calculated dose, and hydroxyurea was decreased to 50% of the full dose. For WBC count of <1000 cells/µl or platelet count < 50,000 platelet/µl on days 0 through 5 of any cycle, paclitaxel and oral hydroxyurea were withheld, whereas 5FU and radiotherapy were continued. In the presence of a persisting fever that exceeded 38°C or other clinically apparent infections, a cycle could be postponed for 1 week or interrupted if this was judged to be necessary in the opinion of treating medical and radiation oncologist. G-CSF was not routinely administered in between cycles, however, in patients who developed grade 3 neutropenia at any time or >= grade 2 neutropenia on day 0 of any cycle, G-CSF (5 µg/kg) was administered on days 6 through 12 at a minimum of 12 h after completion of 5FU. In these patients, G-CSF was used in all subsequent cycles.

Radiotherapy Guidelines.
Patients underwent dental evaluation and treatment as soon as possible during the initial evaluation. Patients underwent CT-based simulation and field arrangements determined with plans to treat gross disease and areas of potential microscopic involvement. Opposed lateral fields were used initially to treat the primary site and neck lymph nodes. The anterior and posterior triangle nodes and the base of skull were included in the initial treatment volume in most cases. In selected cases, a three-field technique or wedged pair was used. Three-dimensional conformal planning and tissue compensators were used when appropriate. If indicated, a separate field was used to treat the supraclavicular fossa. Custom cerrobend blocks were used to shield areas that were not considered at risk of containing disease or to block critical structures such as spinal cord to avoid exceeding tissue tolerance. Each cycle of chemoradiation consisted of 5 consecutive days of concomitant chemoradiotherapy. Patients received 150 cGy twice daily (300 cGy/day and 1500 cGy/week) on the alternate week schedule. There was a minimum of 6 h between fractions. Total radiation dose for presumed microscopic disease was 4500–6300 cGy. Areas of gross disease were boosted after appropriate field reduction to total dose of 7000–7500 cGy.

Statistical Analysis.
After completion of chemoradiotherapy, patients were evaluated for response status using bidimensional measurements as described previously (8 , 9) . Data were summarized using frequencies, percentages, means, SDs, and ranges. Survival time, progression-free survival time, time to locoregional progression, and time to distant progression were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier product limit curves. The term locoregional is used to describe disease in the primary tumor region and/or neck. In the progression-free survival analysis, progression was defined to be the occurrence of at least one of the following events: locoregional progression; distant progression; treatment-related (including late toxicity at any time of follow-up) death; or death from disease. All deaths within 3 months of completion of treatment were reported as treatment related. The log-rank test was used to compare curves between subgroups, in particular, to compare groups receiving or not receiving r-HuEpo.

According to initial study design, 60 patients were to be enrolled with half assigned randomly to receive r-HuEPO based on an expected total response rate (complete response and partial response) among these patients to be ~90%. A 90% response rate among 60 patients would yield a 95% confidence interval for the true response rate of 79–96%. On the basis of data from prior Phase II study, the average change in hematocrit from baseline to end of treatment was -6.3 percentage points. On the basis of the assumption that the addition of r-HuEPO would reduce the mean change to -3.0, then 30 patients in each group would provide > 80% power to detect a difference significant at the 0.05 level. The investigators decided to accrue an additional 30 patients after the initial goal of 60 was met based on early data indicating favorable response and survival rates. These additional patients continued to be randomized to receive r-HuEPO.


    RESULTS
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 PATIENTS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Ninety eligible patients with previously untreated locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer were entered onto the study. Follow-up data from five institutions were available through March 2002. Pretreatment characteristics are listed in Tables 1Citation and 2Citation . Staging information is listed in Table 3Citation . Stage IV, T4, and N2/N3 were encountered in 96, 61, and 66% of patients, respectively.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1 Pretreatment patient characteristics

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2 Tumor characteristics

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3 T and N stage (n = 90)

 
Response.
Twelve patients were not accessible for response; 10 had complete surgical resection (with organ preservation) before chemoradiotherapy, 1 patient withdrew after two cycles, and 1 patient expired before evaluation but after completing all therapy. Of the 78 remaining patients evaluable for response, 68 (87%) achieved a complete response, 8 patients (10%) achieved a partial response, and 2 patients (3%) had progressive disease. Complete response was documented pathologically in 52 of 68 patients, including 7 patients initially felt on clinical restaging to have partial responses but found pathologically to be complete responders. The 8 patients with partial response all had pathologic confirmation of residual disease. The 2 patients with progressive disease developed distant metastases during or immediately after chemoradiotherapy.

Toxicities and Organ Function.
Acute toxicities were severe but manageable in the majority of patients (Table 4)Citation . As in our previous study of T-FHX with 120-h infusion of paclitaxel, mucositis, dermatitis, and pain were the most commonly reported serious nonhematological side effects. Leukopenia and anemia were the most common serious hematological side effects. Fifty-three percent of patients on treatment experienced >10% weight loss. Patients frequently required intensive supportive care, including daily dressing changes for dermatitis and feeding support devices and narcotic analgesia for mucositis and treatment-related odynophagia. As a result, the planned dose intensity was maintained (Table 5)Citation with 86% of patients receiving all planned cycles of chemoradiotherapy and 10 (11%) patients received four of five planned cycles. (All of these were planned to have five cycles, or some were postoperative and planned for only four cycles.)


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 4 Acute toxicity T-FHX (n = 90)

The most severe grade for each patient is recorded. The median hemoglobin nadir was 9.4 gm/dl. Grade 4 leucopenia was defined as nadir <1,000/µl; grade 4 thrombocytopenia was <25,000/µl.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 5 Chemotherapy dose intensity (no. of patients)

 
Of the 49 surviving patients without evidence of disease, 11 remain feeding tube dependent, although one was able to have some oral intake. Three of these were unable to take anything p.o. at baseline; 1 patient was able to drink clear liquids only. Seven of these patients had oropharyngeal cancer (5 tonsil, 1 base of tongue, 1 oral pharynx). The remaining 4 had cancer of the oral tongue, pyriform sinus, and supraglottic larynx (2) . All of these patients had a feeding support device placed before or during treatment, and all but 1 patient never had the tube removed.

Five patients died of treatment-related toxicity in the absence of documented disease progression. Only one of these, a pulmonary embolism, occurred before completion of therapy. Three events were from unknown causes at 2.5, 3 and 5.5 months after the start of therapy, respectively, and one was from bacterial endocarditis 4.5 months after the start of therapy. Two patients died of late toxicity after apparent hemorrhage from the head and neck region but without definitive evidence of local recurrence 7 and 20 months after the start of therapy.

Surgery.
Nineteen patients underwent surgery before chemoradiotherapy, including a neck dissection in 14 patients and surgery at the primary site in 12 patients (Table 6)Citation . Primary site surgeries included 4 tonsillectomies, 2 base of tongue resections, 2 partial maxillectomies, 1 local excision of an anterior tongue primary, and 1 floor of mouth resection, respectively. Two patients underwent laser debulking of a base of tongue and a pyriform sinus primary. Two patients with unknown primary site underwent neck dissections as initial treatment before chemoradiotherapy, one of which also included an ipsilateral tonsillectomy. Of 32 patients who underwent neck dissection after completion of chemoradiotherapy, only 10 were found to have pathologic evidence of residual disease. Radiographic response before neck dissection correlated poorly to pathologic response (Fig. 2)Citation . Two patients with partial responses at the primary site successfully underwent salvage total laryngectomies. In a third patient, salvage surgery was unsuccessful because of unresectable disease.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 6 Surgery

 


View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Correlation of radiographic and pathologic response in 32 patients with N2 or N3 disease who underwent neck dissection.

 
Survival.
With a median follow-up time of 40 months (range, 1.5–58.7 months), the median survival has not yet been attained. Three-year progression free and overall survival rates are 62 and 59%, respectively (Figs. 3Citation and 4Citation ). Twenty-eight patients (31%) have progressed locoregionally and/or distantly (Fig. 5)Citation . Eleven patients (12%) progressed locoregionally and 15 patients (17%) distantly. In 2 patients (2%), initial progression was simultaneously locoregional and distant. Fourteen of 17 patients progressing with distant disease were initially staged N2 (9 patients) or N3 (5 patients). Three of 10 patients with positive neck dissections eventually developed disease progression, 1 with local progression and 2 with distant progression. Of the 22 patients with negative neck dissections, 7 eventually progressed, 6 progressed distantly, and 1 progressed locally and distantly. There was no difference in survival between patients with negative and positive neck dissections. There have been 41 deaths, including 26 (64%) related to disease, 5 (12%) related to toxicities, 2 (5%) from possible late complication, 6 (15%) from unrelated illnesses, and 1 from a second primary (lung cancer). The cause of death in 1 patient could not be determined.



View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Progression-free survival of 90 patients entered on protocol 8626.

 


View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Overall survival of 90 patients entered on protocol 8626.

 


View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. Locoregional and distant progression rates for all patients entered on protocol 8626.

 
Erythropoietin.
Forty-seven (52%) patients were randomized to receive erythropoietin with the objective of maintaining a minimum hemoglobin level of at least 10 g/dl throughout the treatment, whereas 43 patients received no r-HuEpo. Only patients randomized to r-HuEpo actually received it. Transfusions before the start of chemoradiotherapy needed to achieve a baseline hemoglobin of at least 10 g/dl for all patients were not counted in the erythropoietin analysis. Grade 2/3 hemoglobin toxicity was less common in patients receiving erythropoietin than in those not receiving erythropoietin [24 (52%) versus 33 (77%); P = 0.02; Fig. 6Citation ]. However, randomization to erythropoietin did not statistically significantly alter the number of patients requiring transfusion [19 (40%) versus 24 (56%); P = 0.20] nor the mean (median) number of transfusions required [1.28 (0) versus 1.79 (1) ; P = 0.25] to maintain a hemoglobin of 10. Lack of benefit was independent of baseline hemoglobin. As expected, the addition of erythropoietin had no effect on other hematological toxicities such as leukopenia or thrombocytopenia, and the groups did not differ on any QOL, side effect, or performance parameter. The addition of erythropoietin had no significant effect on disease progression, overall survival or response rates (Figs. 7Citation and 8Citation ). The number of transfusions required to maintain a hemoglobin of 10 had no effect on overall survival. However, a baseline hemoglobin level of >=14 g/dl in 16 patients (18%) was associated with improved overall survival (P = 0.05). No patients maintained hemoglobin levels > 14 during treatment (only 2 patients maintained hemoglobin > 12 during treatment). There was no survival benefit at any other hemoglobin level either before or during treatment.



View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6. Effect of erythropoietin on hemoglobin toxicity for the 2 patient cohorts treated with or without Procrit.

 


View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 7. Effect of Procrit on progression-free survival in two patient cohorts treated with or without Procrit.

 


View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 8. Effect of Procrit on overall survival in 2 patient cohorts treated with or without Procrit.

 

    DISCUSSION
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 PATIENTS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
This is the third consecutive Phase II trial from our group investigating intensive concomitant chemoradiotherapy in a curative and organ preserving intent in advanced head and neck cancer (8 , 9) . We demonstrate that paclitaxel in T-FHX can be administered over 1 h rather than over 120 h, easing the administration of that regimen and allowing for the elimination of routine G-CSF support between treatment cycles with no evidence of reduced efficacy (9) . Toxicity and 3-year survival data from the two previously completed studies from our group (continuous infusion T-FHX and C-FHX) are summarized and compared with the current trial in Table 7Citation . Despite the elimination of routine administration of G-CSF between cycles of 1-h T-FHX, grade 3/4 leukopenia was nearly identical to that seen with T-FHX using 120-h infusion, implying that the 1-h schedule is less myelosuppressive. The addition of paclitaxel to FHX had less hematological toxicity and similar nonhematological toxicity compared with the addition of cisplatin to FHX. Although mucositis appears increased in the latter trials, this toxicity is difficult to quantify, and interobserver differences may be partially responsible for this observation. A recent trial by Adelstein et al. (13) using a more traditional cisplatin/5FU regimen with hyperfractionated radiotherapy schedule and a trial by Sunwoo et al. (14) using three cycles of 120-h continuous infusion paclitaxel, and standard fractionated radiotherapy are also included in Table 7Citation . Given the similar outcome data and consistent failure rates and patterns, it appears that paclitaxel can be substituted for cisplatin as a systemically active, radiation-enhancing agent without the subjective side effects and with less myelosuppression associated with cisplatin. Although the Sunwoo trial, using a less intensive chemoradiotherapy schedule, achieves similar overall survival with arguably less toxicity, it is a small trial (n = 33) with a higher percentage of stage 3 patients (15%) than the other trials.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 7 Recent intensified chemoradiotherapy trials

 
The Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer showed a significant survival benefit when chemotherapy was added to definitive radiotherapy. Although cisplatin containing induction therapy demonstrated a small significant benefit, the great majority of survival benefit was realized when chemotherapy was given concomitantly with radiotherapy (4) . Recent randomized trials using platinum-based combination chemoradiotherapy resulted in 3-year survival rates of 51, 55, and 49%, respectively, all significantly superior to survival with radiotherapy alone, with acceptable toxicity (1, 2, 3) . The 3-year overall survival rates with T-FHX in our two large Phase II trials appear to be superior to those achieved in each of these three randomized trials. Thus, treatment intensification as pursued here may lead to higher tumor control rates. This question should be pursued further in a definitive Phase III trial comparing TFHX or a similarly active regimen (13) against more traditional chemoradiotherapy regimens.

There has been debate concerning the surgical management of the neck after completing chemoradiotherapy. In this multicenter study, there was some variance from one site to another, but in general, neck dissection was encouraged for N2 or N3 disease regardless of clinical or radiographic response to T-FHX. Approximately one-third of patients (10 of 32) who underwent neck dissection after chemoradiotherapy had residual disease. This percentage is consistent with that found in our two previous studies and by other investigators (13 , 15 , 16) . Posttreatment CT scan was not a reliable way to access for residual disease with 50% of patients with negative neck dissections having positive CT scans and 40% of patients with positive neck dissections having negative CT scans.

Restaging was done within a 4–6-week window after treatment during which time treatment-related edema could interfere with CT scan interpretation. Of interest, the rate of residual disease in the neck is much lower in our more recent trial that added two cycles of induction chemotherapy to the T-FHX regimen (17) .

There was no clear benefit derived from erythropoietin as used in this study. Although there was a significant decrease in grade 2/3 hemoglobin toxicity, this did not translate clinically to a decreased need for supplemental transfusion of RBCs to maintain hemoglobin of 10 g/dl. Similarly, there was no survival benefit associated with the use of erythropoietin. A hemoglobin level of >14 at baseline, observed in only 16 patients enrolled in the study, was associated with improved survival (P = 0.05). The lack of a benefit from r-HuEpo may be attributable to the short overall treatment duration (9 weeks) and the absence of a platinating agent in our regimen. For these reasons, the study may have been underpowered to detect a small but statistically significant difference.

There have been several recent trials that report pretreatment hemoglobin associated with improved response to chemoradiation in head and neck cancer. Dubray, in a prospective study, demonstrated that anemia was associated with lower locoregional control and survival after radiation therapy for head and neck cancer (18) . Haddad et al. (19) and Budach et al. (20) reported that hemoglobin levels >12 and 14, respectively, were associated with improved locoregional control and overall survival. Staar et al. (21) have also reported on initial hemoglobin level as a significant factor for survival in patients treated with hyperfractionated radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. Contrary to our findings Dunphy et al. (22) report in a study, which included induction chemotherapy, that the addition of erythropoietin significantly reduced anemia and the need for transfusions. Glaser et al. (23) report both correction of anemia and improved efficacy in patients receiving erythropoietin during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. On the basis of these trials, a hemoglobin between 12 and 14 g/dl rather than 10 g/dl may be necessary to significantly improve response, survival, and decrease need for transfusion.

One-h T-FHX has a high complete response rate, and overall survival is as good as or better than regimens currently being evaluated in randomized trials. Toxicity remains severe but manageable, and although patients report significant functional and QOL declines during treatment, the majority of these resolve to pretreatment levels by 12 months. On the other hand, even 2–4 years posttreatment completion, a subgroup of patients continue to have significant problems eating with up to 22% remaining tube dependent (24) . Clearly QOL and functional parameters must be included in the design and analysis of aggressive chemoradiotherapy regimens, with the additional goal of identifying baseline parameters that might place patients at risk for long-term impairment. Treatment strategies such as alternating weeks of chemotherapy and radiotherapy or single agent chemoradiotherapy in the recently reported Head and Neck Intergroup Trial have generally proved less toxic but with lower survival in comparison to the intensified multiagent chemoradiotherapy regimens (25 , 26) .

As in prior trials from our group, as well as others using intensified chemoradiotherapy regimens, a reversal of the usual pattern of disease progression has emerged (8 , 9 , 13) . With locoregional control rate of 83%, distant disease failure has become more common than locoregional failure (Fig. 5)Citation . Although trials of induction chemotherapy have failed to consistently demonstrate a survival benefit over radiation alone in advanced head and neck cancer, several trials have demonstrated a decrease in distant metastases (27, 28, 29, 30) . Neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved survival in the Groupe d’Etude de Tumeurs de la Tête et du Cou trial, although 73% of patients had stage II and III disease, as well as in subgroup analysis of patients with resectable disease in the Paccagnella trial (29 , 31) . Posner et al. (32) in a recent series of Phase II trials has achieved high complete response rates with intensive induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy. Therefore, the current focus of our group is to integrate a brief, active induction regimen to precede 1-h T-FHX with the expectation of maintaining a high rate of locoregional control and decreasing distant disease failure. A secondary objective will be to select patients, based on their local response to induction chemotherapy, who might be safely treated with a lower total dose of radiotherapy and thus decrease toxicity from the regimen (17) .


    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Michelle Scheuer for assistance with the preparation of the manuscript and Delores Watts, Gemetta Wallace, Jan-Marie McEvilly, Mary Jesse, Rosalyn Williams, Dr. Theodore Chung, Dr. Rod Humerickhouse, Dr. Henry Briele and Bing Bing Fung for assistance with data management, statistical analysis, and patient care.


    FOOTNOTES
 
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1 This study was supported, in part, by the University of Chicago/Northwestern University Oral Cancer Research Center Grant P50 DE11921, University of Chicago Cancer Research Center Grant P30 CA14599, The Francis Lederer Foundation, The Geraldi Norton Memorial Corporation, The Robert and Valda Svendsen Memorial, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey, and Ortho Biotech, Raritan, New Jersey. Back

2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, MC 2115, Chicago, IL 60637-1470. Phone: (773) 834-3093; Fax: (773) 702-3002; E-mail: evokes{at}medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu Back

3 The abbreviations used are: FHX, fluorouracil, hydroxyurea, and radiotherapy; C-FHX, addition of cisplatin to FHX; T-FHX, addition of paclitaxel to FHX; r-HuEpo, recombinant human erythropoietin; CT, computed tomography; 5FU, 5-fluorouracil; G-CSF, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; QOL, quality of life. Back

Received 8/14/02; revised 12/26/02; accepted 12/31/02.


    REFERENCES
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 PATIENTS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Calais G., Alfonsi M., Bardet E., Sire C., Germain T., Bergerot P., Rhein B., Tortochaux J., Oudinot P., Bertrand P. Randomized trial of radiation therapy versus concomitant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. (Bethesda), 91: 2081-2086, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Brizel D. M., Albers M. E., Fisher S. R., Scher R. L., Richtsmeier W. J., Hars V., George S. L., Huang A. T., Prosnitz L. R. Hyperfractionated irradiation with or without concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer. N. Engl. J. Med., 338: 1798-1804, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Wendt T. G., Grabenbauer G. G., Rodel C. M., Thiel H. J., Aydin H., Rohloff R., Wustrow T. P., Iro H., Popella C., Schalhorn A. Simultaneous radiochemotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in advanced head and neck cancer: a randomized multicenter study. J. Clin. Oncol., 16: 1318-1324, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Pignon J. P., Bourhis J., Domenge C., Designe L. Chemotherapy added to locoregional treatment for head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma: three meta-analyses of updated individual data. MACH-NC Collaborative Group. Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy on Head and Neck Cancer. Lancet, 355: 949-955, 2000.[Medline]
  5. Forastiere A., Koch W., Trotti A., Sidransky D. Head and neck cancer. N. Engl. J. Med., 345: 1890-1900, 2001.[Free Full Text]
  6. Vokes E. E., Panje W. R., Schilsky R. L., Mick R., Awan A. M., Moran W. J., Goldman M. D., Tybor A. G., Weichselbaum R. R. Hydroxyurea, fluorouracil, and concomitant radiotherapy in poor-prognosis head and neck cancer: a Phase I-II study. J. Clin. Oncol., 7: 761-768, 1989.[Abstract]
  7. Garden A. S., Pajak T. F., Vokes E., Forastiere A., Ridge J., Jones C., Horwitz E., Nabell L., Glisson B., Cooper J. S., Demas W., Gore E. Preliminary results of RTOG 9703: a Phase II randomized trial of concurrent radiation (RT) and chemotherapy for advanced squamous cell carcinomas (SCC) of the head and neck. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 20: 223a 2001.
  8. Vokes E. E., Kies M. S., Haraf D. J., Stenson K., List M., Humerickhouse R., Dolan M. E., Pelzer H., Sulzen L., Witt M. E., Hsieh Y. C., Mittal B. B., Weichselbaum R. R. Concomitant chemoradiotherapy as primary therapy for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer. J. Clin. Oncol., 18: 1652-1661, 2000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Kies M. S., Haraf D. J., Rosen F., Stenson K., List M., Brockstein B., Chung T., Mittal B. B., Pelzer H., Portugal L., Rademaker A., Weichselbaum R., Vokes E. E. Concomitant infusional paclitaxel and fluorouracil, oral hydroxyurea, and hyperfractionated radiation for locally advanced squamous head and neck cancer. J. Clin. Oncol., 19: 1961-1969, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Overgaard J., Hansen H. S., Jorgensen K., Hjelm Hansen M. Primary radiotherapy of larynx and pharynx carcinoma: an analysis of some factors influencing local control and survival. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 12: 515-521, 1986.[Medline]
  11. Henry D. H. Recombinant human erythropoietin treatment of anemic cancer patients. Cancer Pract., 4: 180-184, 1996.[Medline]
  12. Brockstein B., Haraf D. J., Stenson K., Sulzen L., Witt M. E., Weichselbaum R. W., Vokes E. E. A Phase I-II study of concomitant chemoradiotherapy with paclitaxel (one-hour infusion), 5-fluorouracil and hydroxyurea with granulocyte colony stimulating factor support for patients with poor prognosis head and neck cancer. Ann. Oncol., 11: 721-728, 2000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Adelstein D. J., Saxton J. P., Lavertu P., Rybicki L. A., Esclamado R. M., Wood B. G., Strome M., Carroll M. A. Maximizing local control and organ preservation in stage IV squamous cell head and neck cancer with hyperfractionated radiation and concurrent chemotherapy. J. Clin. Oncol., 20: 1405-1410, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Sunwoo J. B., Herscher L. L., Kroog G. S., Thomas G. R., Ondrey F. G., Duffey D. C., Solomon B. I., Boss C., Albert P. J., McCullugh L., et al Concurrent paclitaxel and radiation in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer. J. Clin. Oncol., 19: 800-811, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Boyd T. S., Harari P. M., Tannehill S. P., Voytovich M. C., Hartig G. K., Ford C. N., Foote R. L., Campbell B. H., Schultz C. J. Planned postradiotherapy neck dissection in patients with advanced head and neck cancer. Head Neck, 20: 132-137, 1998.[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Sanguineti G., Corvo R., Benasso M., Margarino G., Sormani M., Roncallo F., Mereu P., Bacigalupo A., Vitale V. Management of the neck after alternating chemoradiotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer. Head Neck, 21: 223-228, 1999.[CrossRef][Medline]
  17. Vokes E. E., Rosen F. R., Kies M. S., List M. A., Rademaker A., Stenson K., Brockstein B. E., Portugal L., Mittal B. B., Pelzer H., Argiris A., Williams R. D., Weichselbaum R. R., Haraf D. J. Weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by concomitant T-FHX chemoradiotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer: a potentially successful strategy. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 21: 230a 2002.
  18. Dubray B., Mosseri V., Brunin F., Jaulerry C., Poncet P., Rodriguez J., Brugere J., Point D., Giraud P., Cosset J. M. Anemia is associated with lower local-regional control and survival after radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: a prospective study. Radiology, 201: 553-558, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Haddad R., Suntharalingam M., Chen T., Levy S., Vanecho D. A. Pretreatment hemoglobin is associated with response to chemoradiation therapy in patients with advanced unresectable squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 19: 417a 2000.
  20. Budach V. G., Haake K., Stueben G., Sack H., Jahnke K-D., Baumann M., Hermann T., Budach W., Bamberg M., Sauer R., Hinkelbein W., Frommhold H., Wernecke K-D. Accelerated chemoradiation to 70.6 Gy is more effective than accelerated radiation to 77.6 Gy alone: two year’s results of a German multicenter randomized trial (aro 95–6). Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 20: 224a 2001.
  21. Staar S., Rudat V., Stuetzer H., Dietz A., Volling P., Schroeder M., Flentje M., Eckel H. E., Mueller R. P. Intensified hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy limits the additional benefit of simultaneous chemotherapy: results of a multicentric randomized German trial in advanced head-and-neck cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 50: 1161-1171, 2001.[CrossRef][Medline]
  22. Dunphy F. R., Harrison B. R., Dunleavy T. L., Rodriguez J. J., Hilton J. G. Erythropoietin reduces anemia and transfusions: a randomized trial with or without erythropoietin during chemotherapy. Cancer (Phila.), 86: 1362-1367, 1999.[CrossRef][Medline]
  23. Glaser C., Millesi W., Wanschitz B. R-HuERythropoietin treatment increases efficacy of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy improves cancer free survival of patient with oral squamous cell carcinoma: a 17 month follow up. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 18: 399a 1999.
  24. List M., Haraf D., Stracks J., Brockstein B., Kies M., Rosen F., Vokes E. Quality of life/performance in head and neck cancer: comparison between paclitaxel-based and cisplatin-based concomitant chemoradiotherapy regimens. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 19: 412a 2000.
  25. Merlano M., Benasso M., Corvo R., Rosso R., Vitale V., Blengio F., Numico G., Margarino G., Bonelli L., Santi L. Five-year update of a randomized trial of alternating radiotherapy and chemotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone in treatment of unresectable squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. (Bethesda), 88: 583-589, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Adelstein D. J., Adams G. L., Li Y., Wagner H., Kish J. A., Ensley J. F., Schuller D. E., Forastiere A. A. A Phase III comparison of standard radiation therapy (RT) versus RT plus concurrent cisplatin (DDP) versus split-course RT plus concurrent DDP and 5-fluorouracil (5FU) in patients with unresectable squamous cell head and neck cancer (SCHNC): an Intergroup study. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 19: 411a 2000.
  27. Induction chemotherapy plus radiation compared with surgery plus radiation in patients with advanced laryngeal cancer. The Department of Veterans Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study Group. N. Engl. J. Med., 324: 1685-1690, 1991.[Abstract]
  28. Lefebvre J. L., Chevalier D., Luboinski B., Kirkpatrick A., Collette L., Sahmoud T. Larynx preservation in pyriform sinus cancer: preliminary results of a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Phase III trial. EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. (Bethesda), 88: 890-899, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Paccagnella A., Orlando A., Marchiori C., Zorat P. L., Cavaniglia G., Sileni V. C., Jirillo A., Tomio L., Fila G., Fede A. Phase III trial of initial chemotherapy in stage III or IV head and neck cancers: a study by the Gruppo di Studio sui Tumori della Testa e del Collo. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. (Bethesda), 86: 265-272, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Kies M. S., Haraf D. J., Athanasiadis I., Kozloff M., Mittal B., Pelzer H., Rademaker A. W., Wenig B., Weichselbaum R. R., Vokes E. E. Induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiation for advanced head and neck cancer: improved disease control and survival. J. Clin. Oncol., 16: 2715-2721, 1998.[Abstract]
  31. Domenge C., Hill C., Lefebvre J. L., et al Randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oropharyngeal carcinoma. Br. J. Cancer, 83: 1594-1598, 2000.[CrossRef][Medline]
  32. Posner M. R., Colevas A. D., Tishler R. B. The role of induction chemotherapy in the curative treatment of squamous cell cancer of the head and neck. Semin. Oncol., 27 (Suppl. 8): 13-24, 2000.



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
B. R. Knab, J. K. Salama, A. Solanki, K. M. Stenson, E. E. Cohen, M. E. Witt, D. J. Haraf, and E. E. Vokes
Functional organ preservation with definitive chemoradiotherapy for T4 laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma
Ann. Onc., May 7, 2008; (2008) mdn173v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CA Cancer J ClinHome page
N. Choong and E. Vokes
Expanding Role of the Medical Oncologist in the Management of Head and Neck Cancer
CA Cancer J Clin, January 1, 2008; 58(1): 32 - 53.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
D. S. Shewach and T. S. Lawrence
Antimetabolite Radiosensitizers
J. Clin. Oncol., September 10, 2007; 25(26): 4043 - 4050.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
J. Bohlius, J. Wilson, J. Seidenfeld, M. Piper, G. Schwarzer, J. Sandercock, S. Trelle, O. Weingart, S. Bayliss, B. Djulbegovic, et al.
Recombinant human erythropoietins and cancer patients: updated meta-analysis of 57 studies including 9353 patients.
J Natl Cancer Inst, May 17, 2006; 98(10): 708 - 714.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
J. Bohlius, S. Langensiepen, G. Schwarzer, J. Seidenfeld, M. Piper, C. Bennett, and A. Engert
Recombinant Human Erythropoietin and Overall Survival in Cancer Patients: Results of a Comprehensive Meta-analysis
J Natl Cancer Inst, April 6, 2005; 97(7): 489 - 498.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
M. O. Arcasoy, K. Amin, S.-C. Chou, Z. A. Haroon, M. Varia, and J. A. Raleigh
Erythropoietin and Erythropoietin Receptor Expression in Head and Neck Cancer: Relationship to Tumor Hypoxia
Clin. Cancer Res., January 1, 2005; 11(1): 20 - 27.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
B. Brockstein, D. J. Haraf, A. W. Rademaker, M. S. Kies, K. M. Stenson, F. Rosen, B. B. Mittal, H. Pelzer, B. B. Fung, M.-E. Witt, et al.
Patterns of failure, prognostic factors and survival in locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer treated with concomitant chemoradiotherapy: a 9-year, 337-patient, multi-institutional experience
Ann. Onc., August 1, 2004; 15(8): 1179 - 1186.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
M. T. Milano, D. J. Haraf, K. M. Stenson, M. E. Witt, C. Eng, B. B. Mittal, A. Argiris, H. Pelzer, M. F. Kozloff, and E. E. Vokes
Phase I Study of Concomitant Chemoradiotherapy with Paclitaxel, Fluorouracil, Gemcitabine, and Twice-Daily Radiation in Patients with Poor-Prognosis Cancer of the Head and Neck
Clin. Cancer Res., August 1, 2004; 10(15): 4922 - 4932.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
D. J. Haraf, F. R. Rosen, K. Stenson, A. Argiris, B. B. Mittal, M. E. Witt, B. E. Brockstein, M. A. List, L. Portugal, H. Pelzer, et al.
Induction Chemotherapy followed by Concomitant TFHX Chemoradiotherapy with Reduced Dose Radiation in Advanced Head and Neck Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res., December 1, 2003; 9(16): 5936 - 5943.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
E. B. Lamont, D. Hayreh, K. E. Pickett, J. J. Dignam, M. A. List, K. M. Stenson, D. J. Haraf, B. E. Brockstein, S. A. Sellergren, and E. E. Vokes
Is Patient Travel Distance Associated With Survival on Phase II Clinical Trials in Oncology?
J Natl Cancer Inst, September 17, 2003; 95(18): 1370 - 1375.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, F. R.
Right arrow Articles by Vokes, E. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, F. R.
Right arrow Articles by Vokes, E. E.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS