1.Adjuvant chemotherapy versus adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy after radical surgery for early-stage cervical cancer: a randomized, non-inferiority, multicenter trial.
Danhui WENG ; Huihua XIONG ; Changkun ZHU ; Xiaoyun WAN ; Yaxia CHEN ; Xinyu WANG ; Youzhong ZHANG ; Jie JIANG ; Xi ZHANG ; Qinglei GAO ; Gang CHEN ; Hui XING ; Changyu WANG ; Kezhen LI ; Yaheng CHEN ; Yuyan MAO ; Dongxiao HU ; Zimin PAN ; Qingqin CHEN ; Baoxia CUI ; Kun SONG ; Cunjian YI ; Guangcai PENG ; Xiaobing HAN ; Ruifang AN ; Liangsheng FAN ; Wei WANG ; Tingchuan XIONG ; Yile CHEN ; Zhenzi TANG ; Lin LI ; Xingsheng YANG ; Xiaodong CHENG ; Weiguo LU ; Hui WANG ; Beihua KONG ; Xing XIE ; Ding MA
Frontiers of Medicine 2023;17(1):93-104
We conducted a prospective study to assess the non-inferiority of adjuvant chemotherapy alone versus adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) as an alternative strategy for patients with early-stage (FIGO 2009 stage IB-IIA) cervical cancer having risk factors after surgery. The condition was assessed in terms of prognosis, adverse effects, and quality of life. This randomized trial involved nine centers across China. Eligible patients were randomized to receive adjuvant chemotherapy or CCRT after surgery. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). From December 2012 to December 2014, 337 patients were subjected to randomization. Final analysis included 329 patients, including 165 in the adjuvant chemotherapy group and 164 in the adjuvant CCRT group. The median follow-up was 72.1 months. The three-year PFS rates were both 91.9%, and the five-year OS was 90.6% versus 90.0% in adjuvant chemotherapy and CCRT groups, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the PFS or OS between groups. The adjusted HR for PFS was 0.854 (95% confidence interval 0.415-1.757; P = 0.667) favoring adjuvant chemotherapy, excluding the predefined non-inferiority boundary of 1.9. The chemotherapy group showed a tendency toward good quality of life. In comparison with post-operative adjuvant CCRT, adjuvant chemotherapy treatment showed non-inferior efficacy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer having pathological risk factors. Adjuvant chemotherapy alone is a favorable alternative post-operative treatment.
Female
;
Humans
;
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/drug therapy*
;
Prospective Studies
;
Quality of Life
;
Neoplasm Staging
;
Chemoradiotherapy
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/adverse effects*
;
Adjuvants, Immunologic
;
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use*
;
Retrospective Studies
2.Hotspots and prospects of esophageal cancer research in China.
Yousheng MAO ; Shu Geng GAO ; Yin LI ; Qi XUE ; Feng LI ; Dong Hui JIN ; Hang YI ; Jie HE
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2023;26(4):307-311
Esophageal cancer is a malignant tumor with a high incidence in China. At pesent, advanced esophageal cancer patients are still frequently encountered. The primary treatment for resectable advanced esophageal cancer is surgery-based multimodality therapy, including preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, such as chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy plus immunotherapy, followed by radical esophagectomy with thoraco-abdominal two-field or cervico-thoraco-abdominal three-field lymphadenectomy via minimally invasive approach or thoracotomy. In addition, adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy, or immunotherapy may also be administered if suggested by postoperative pathological results. Although the treatment outcome of esophageal cancer has improved significantly in China, many clinical issues remain controversial. In this article, we summarize the current hotspots and important issues of esophageal cancer in China, including prevention and early diagnosis, treatment selection for early esophageal cancer, surgical approach selection, lymphadenectomy method, preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, postoperative adjuvant therapy, and nutritional support treatment.
Humans
;
Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery*
;
Combined Modality Therapy
;
Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods*
;
Chemoradiotherapy
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Esophagectomy/methods*
3.Current status and prospect of perioperative therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer.
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2021;24(2):101-106
Local advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) accounts for a large proportion of annual newly diagnosed gastric cancer patients in China. There is a general consensus for D2 radical gastrectomy followed by postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for LAGC patients, and this therapeutic strategy has been confirmed by a series of clinical trials to obviously improve the patients' prognosis; however, the recurrence rate is still high (about 50%-80% in advanced stage), which makes it difficult to further improve the long-term survival. Perioperative therapy, especially whether preoperative neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) can improve the efficacy of patients with LAGC, has been paid more and more attention. NAT is mainly defined as a preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, aiming at increasing curative resection rate by downstaging tumor, eliminating micrometastases, and autologously testing of anti-cancer drug sensitivity etc. However, there are still some controversy whether LAGC patients could gain survival benefit from NAT and also lack of general consensus for this issue. In this paper, the author reviews and analyzes the current situation of perioperative therapies for LAGC patients, especially emphasize the results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy reported by various high-level clinical studies. The preliminary effect of perioperative chemotherapy combined with molecular targeted or immunotherapy has also aroused great interest and attention. While we continue to carry out NAT and look forward to more new high-level evidence trials on NAT, we must emphasize again that R0 gastrectomy remains the most important therapeutic modality for the patients with LAGC.
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use*
;
Chemoradiotherapy
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Combined Modality Therapy
;
Gastrectomy/methods*
;
Humans
;
Lymph Node Excision
;
Neoadjuvant Therapy
;
Neoplasm Staging
;
Perioperative Care/trends*
;
Stomach Neoplasms/therapy*
4.Exploration and thoughts on perioperative treatment of advanced gastric cancer.
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2021;24(2):112-117
Perioperative treatment is critical to improve the outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer. There are three therapeutic modes of perioperative treatment for resectable gastric cancer: neoadjuvant chemotherapy+ D1/D2 surgery+ adjuvant chemotherapy, D0/D1 surgery+ adjuvant radiochemotherapy, and D2 surgery+ adjuvant chemotherapy. Over the decades, a large number of clinical studies had been conducted to optimize the perioperative treatment mode of gastric cancer, including the postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy, and perioperative chemotherapy, and to explore the feasibility of preoperative radiochemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy in advanced gastric cancer. After nearly 20 years of development and exploration, although the perioperative treatment mode for advanced gastric cancer has become standardized, there are still some core issues that need to be solved urgently, including the selection of population for perioperative treatment, the limitation of efficaly evaluation criteria, insufficient emphasis on laparoscopic exploration before neoadjuvant treatment, and lack of exploration in esophagogastric junction cancer. We should fully integrate the current clinical research data into clinical practice, adopt a multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment mode, and follow the principles of standardized diagnosis and treatment based on a multi-dimensional analysis of patient characteristics, and formulate the most reasonable treatment strategy to ultimately benefit patients.
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage*
;
Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Combined Modality Therapy
;
Esophagogastric Junction
;
Gastrectomy
;
Humans
;
Lymph Node Excision
;
Neoadjuvant Therapy
;
Perioperative Care
;
Stomach Neoplasms/therapy*
5.Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy combined with surgery versus direct surgery in the treatment of Siewert type II and III adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction: long-term prognostic analysis of a prospective randomized controlled trial.
Yuan TIAN ; Qiang WANG ; Jun WANG ; Xue Ying QIAO ; Jun ZHANG ; Ye Cheng LIN ; Yong LI ; Li Qiao FAN ; Pei Gang YANG ; Qun ZHAO
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2021;24(2):128-137
Objective: To investigate the effectiveness, safety, and prognosis of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for Siewert type II and III adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Methods: This study is a prospective randomized controlled clinical study (NCT01962246). AEG patients who were treated at the Third Department of Surgery of the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University from February 2012 to June 2016 were included. All of the enrolled patients were diagnosed with type II or III locally advanced AEG gastric cancer (T2-4N0-3M0 or T1N1-3M0) by gastroscopy and CT before operation; the longitudinal axis of the lesion was ≤ 8 cm; no anti-tumor treatment was previously given and no contraindications of chemotherapy and surgery were found. Case exclusion criteria: serious diseases accompanied by liver and kidney, cardiovascular system and other vital organs; allergy to capecitabine or oxaliplatin drugs or excipients; receiving any form of chemotherapy or other research drugs; pregnant or lactating women; patients with diseases resulting in difficulty to take capecitabine or with concurrent tumors. Based on sample size estimation, a total of 150 AEG patients were enrolled. Using the random number table method, the enrolled patients were divided into the nCRT group and the direct operation group with 75 cases in each group. The nCRT group received XELOX chemotherapy (capecitabine+ oxaliplatin) before surgery and concurrent radiotherapy (45 Gy, 25 times, 1.8 Gy/d, 5 times/week). Clinical efficacy of the nCRT group was evaluated by the solid tumor efficacy evaluation standard (RECIST1.1) and the tumor volume reduction rate was measured on CT. After completing the preoperative examination in the direct operation group, and 8-10 weeks after the end of nCRT in the nCRT group, surgery was performed. Laparoscopic exploration was initially performed. According to the Japanese "Regulations for the Treatment of Gastric Cancer", a transabdominal radical total gastrectomy combined with perigastric lymph node dissection was performed. The primary outcome was the 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival rate (DFS); the secondary outcomes were R0 resection rate, the toxicity of chemotherapy, and surgical complications. The follow-up ended on December 31, 2019. The postoperative recurrence, metastasis and survival time of the two groups were collected. Results: After excluding patients with incomplete clinical data, patients or family members requesting to withdraw informed consent, and those failing to follow the treatment plan, 63 cases in the nCRT group and 69 cases in the direct operation group were finally enrolled in the study. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics of the two groups (all P>0.05). Sixty-three patients in the nCRT group were evaluated by RECIST1.1 after treatment, the image based effective rate was 42.9% (27/63), and the stable disease rate was 98.4% (62/63); the tumor volume before and after nCRT measured on CT was (58.8±24.4) cm(3) and (46.6±25.7) cm(3), respectively, the effective rate of tumor volume reduction measured by CT was 47.6% (30/63). Incidences of neutrophilopenia [65.1% (41/63) vs. 40.6% (28/69), χ(2)=7.923, P=0.005], nausea [81.0% (51/63) vs. 56.5% (39/69), χ(2)=9.060, P=0.003] and fatigue [74.6% (47/63) vs. 42.0% (29/69), χ(2)=14.306, P=0.001] in the nCRT group were significantly higher than those in the direct surgery group. Radiation gastritis/esophagitis and radiation pneumonia were unique adverse reactions in the nCRT group, with incidences of 52.4% (33/63) and 15.9%(10/63), respectively. The classification of tumor regression of 63 patients in nCRT group presented as 11 cases of grade 0 (17.5%), 20 cases of grade 1 (31.7%), 28 cases of grade 2 (44.4%), and 5 cases of grade 3 (7.9%). Eleven (17.5%) patients achieved pathologic complete response. Sixty-one (96.8%) patients in the nCRT group underwent R0 resection, which was higher than 87.0% (60/69) in the direct surgery group (χ(2)=4.199, P=0.040). The mean number of harvested lymph nodes in the specimens in the nCRT group and the direct operation group was 27.6±12.4 and 26.8±14.6, respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant (t=-0.015, P=0.976). The pathological lymph node metastasis rate and lymph node ratio in the two groups were 44.4% (28/63) vs. 76.8% (53/69), and 4.0% (70/1 739) vs. 21.9% (404/1 847), respectively with statistically significant differences (χ(2)=14.552, P<0.001, and χ(2)=248.736, P<0.001, respectively). During a median follow-up of 52 (27-77) months, the 3-year DFS rate in the nCRT group and the direct surgery group was 52.4% and 39.1% (P=0.049), and the 3-year OS rate was 63.4% and 52.2% (P=0.019), respectively. According to whether the tumor volume reduction rate measured by CT was ≥ 12.5%, 63 patients in the nCRT group were divided into the effective group (n=30) and the ineffective group (n=33). The 3-year DFS rate of these two subgracps was 56.6% and 45.5%, respectively without significant difference (P=0.098). The 3-year OS rate was 73.3% and 51.5%,respectively with significant difference (P=0.038). The 3-year DFS rate of patients with the tumor regression grades 0, 1, 2 and 3 was 81.8%, 70.0%, 44.4%, and 20.0%, repectively (P=0.024); the 3-year OS rate was 81.8%, 75.0%, 48.1% and 40.0%, repectively (P=0.048). Conclusion: nCRT improves treatment efficacy of Siewert type II and III AEG patients, and the long-term prognosis is good.
Adenocarcinoma/therapy*
;
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use*
;
Capecitabine/administration & dosage*
;
Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Esophagogastric Junction/surgery*
;
Gastrectomy
;
Humans
;
Lymph Node Excision
;
Neoadjuvant Therapy
;
Neoplasm Staging
;
Oxaliplatin/administration & dosage*
;
Prognosis
;
Prospective Studies
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Stomach Neoplasms/therapy*
6.Does total regression of primary rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy represent “no tumor” status?
Seong A JEONG ; In Ja PARK ; Seung Mo HONG ; Jun Woo BONG ; Hye Yoon CHOI ; Ji Hyun SEO ; Hyong Eun KIM ; Seok Byung LIM ; Chang Sik YU ; Jin Cheon KIM
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 2019;96(2):78-85
PURPOSE: Insistence that total regression of primary tumor would not represent long-term oncologic outcomes has been raised. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of these patients after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) and radical surgery and to evaluate the associated risk factors. METHODS: We included 189 patients with rectal cancer who showed total regression of the primary tumor after PCRT, followed by radical resection, between 2001 and 2012. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the results were compared with 77 patients with Tis rectal cancer who received only radical resection. Factors associated with RFS were evaluated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Sphincter-saving resection was performed for 146 patients (77.2%). Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 168 patients (88.9%). During the follow-up period, recurrence occurred in 17 patients (9%). The 5-year RFS was 91.3%, which was significantly lower than that of patients with Tis rectal cancer without PCRT (P = 0.005). In univariate analysis, preoperative CEA and histologic differentiation were associated with RFS. However, no factors were found to be associated with RFS. CONCLUSION: RFS was lower in patients with total regression of primary rectal cancer after PCRT than in those with Tis rectal cancer without PCRT, and it would not be considered as the same entity with early rectal cancer or “disappeared tumor” status.
Chemoradiotherapy
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Humans
;
Methods
;
Rectal Neoplasms
;
Recurrence
;
Risk Factors
7.A randomized controlled trial comparing concurrent chemoradiation versus concurrent chemoradiation followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients: ACTLACC trial
Siriwan TANGJITGAMOL ; Ekkasit THARAVICHITKUL ; Chokaew TOVANABUTRA ; Kanisa RONGSRIYAM ; Tussawan ASAKIJ ; Kannika PAENGCHIT ; Jirasak SUKHABOON ; Somkit PENPATTANAGUL ; Apiradee KRIDAKARA ; Jitti HANPRASERTPONG ; Kittisak CHOMPRASERT ; Sirentra WANGLIKITKOON ; Thiti ATJIMAKUL ; Piyawan PARIYAWATEEKUL ; Kanyarat KATANYOO ; Prapai TANPRASERT ; Wanwipa JANWEERACHAI ; Duangjai SANGTHAWAN ; Jakkapan KHUNNARONG ; Taywin CHOTTETANAPRASITH ; Busaba SUPAWATTANABODEE ; Prasert LERTSANGUANSINCHAI ; Jatupol SRISOMBOON ; Wanrudee ISARANUWATCHAI ; Vichan LORVIDHAYA
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2019;30(4):e82-
OBJECTIVE: To compare response rate and survivals of locally advanced stage cervical cancer patients who had standard concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) alone to those who had adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) after CCRT. METHODS: Patients aged 18–70 years who had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IIB–IVA without para-aortic lymph node enlargement, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores 0–2, and non-aggressive histopathology were randomized to have CCRT with weekly cisplatin followed by observation (arm A) or by ACT with paclitaxel plus carboplatin every 4 weeks for 3 cycles (arm B). RESULTS: Data analysis of 259 patients showed no significant difference in complete responses at 4 months after treatment between arm A (n=129) and arm B (n=130): 94.1% vs. 87.0% (p=0.154) respectively. With the median follow-up of 27.4 months, 15.5% of patients in arm A and 10.8% in arm B experienced recurrences (p=0.123). There were no significant differences of overall or loco-regional failure. However, systemic recurrences were significantly lower in arm B than arm A: 5.4% vs. 10.1% (p=0.029). The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and 3-year overall survival (OS) of the patients in both arms were not significantly different. The hazard ratio of PFS and OS of arm B compared to arm A were 1.26 (95% CI=0.82–1.96; p=0.293) and 1.42 (95% CI=0.81–2.49; p=0.221) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ACT with paclitaxel plus carboplatin after CCRT did not improve response rate and survival compared to CCRT alone. Only significant decrease of systemic recurrences with ACT was observed, but not overall or loco-regional failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02036164 Thai Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: TCTR 20140106001
Arm
;
Asian Continental Ancestry Group
;
Carboplatin
;
Chemoradiotherapy
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Cisplatin
;
Disease-Free Survival
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Gynecology
;
Humans
;
Lymph Nodes
;
Obstetrics
;
Paclitaxel
;
Recurrence
;
Statistics as Topic
;
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
8.Impact of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Completion on Oncologic Outcomes in ypTNMstage 2 Rectal Cancer Patients
Youn Young PARK ; Kang Young LEE ; Nam Kyu KIM ; Sat Byol LEE ; Ga Ram KIM ; Byung Soh MIN ; Seong Taek OH
Annals of Coloproctology 2019;35(6):335-341
PURPOSE: Adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT) in rectal cancer patients who have undergone curative resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) is controversial. We aimed to investigate the benefits of using aCT and the clinical impact of completing aCT in ypstage 2 rectal cancer patients.METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed clinicopathological data from patients who had undergone radical resection after nCRT between January 2006 and December 2012. In total, 152 patients with ypT3/4N0M0 rectal cancer were included. Of these patients, 139 initiated aCT, while 13 did not receive aCT (no-aCT). Among those who received aCT, 132 patients completed their planned cycles (aCT-completion) whereas 7 did not (aCT-incompletion). All patients received longcourse chemoradiation; a 5-fluorouracil-based regimen was used for nCRT in most patients. The prognostic factors affecting disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed.RESULTS: The median follow-up duration was 41 months. Demographic data did not differ significantly among the 3 groups. In multivariate analysis, open surgery, a tumor size >2 cm, retrieval of <12 lymph nodes, circumferential resection margin (CRM) positivity and aCT incompletion were independent prognostic factors for poor DFS. Old age (≥60 years), open surgery, CRM positivity, aCT incompletion, and lack of aCT initiation compared to aCT completion were independent prognostic factors for poor OS.CONCLUSION: In ypstage 2 rectal cancer patients, aCT after nCRT and total mesorectal excision affected both DFS and OS; however, only patients who completed planned aCT exhibited survival benefits. Therefore, improving patients’ compliance with the completion of aCT is desirable.
Chemoradiotherapy
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Compliance
;
Disease-Free Survival
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Humans
;
Lymph Nodes
;
Multivariate Analysis
;
Neoadjuvant Therapy
;
Rectal Neoplasms
;
Retrospective Studies
9.Risk factors for locoregional recurrence in patients with pathologic T3N0 rectal cancer with negative resection margin treated by surgery alone
Jong Yun BAEK ; Jeong Il YU ; Hee Chul PARK ; Doo Ho CHOI ; Gyu Sang YOO ; Won Kyung CHO ; Woo Yong LEE ; Seong Hyeon YUN ; Yong Beom CHO ; Yoon Ah PARK ; Hee Cheol KIM
Radiation Oncology Journal 2019;37(2):110-116
PURPOSE: This study aimed to identify prognostic factors for locoregional recurrence (LRR) in pT3N0 rectal cancer patients who were treated with surgery alone and had negative resection margin including circumferential resection margin (CRM) for optimal indication of adjuvant radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed patients with pT3N0 rectal cancer who were treated via upfront surgery and had no other adjuvant treatment from January 2003 to December 2012. In total, 122 patients who had negative resection margin including negative CRM were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The median follow-up period after surgery was 60 months (range, 3 to 161 months). During this time, 6 patients (4.9%) experienced LRR at the anastomotic site (4 patients), and regional lymphatic area (2 patients). The estimated 5-year rates of overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and LRR-free survival were 96.7%, 84.6%, and 94.0%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that level of tumor ≤5 cm was a significant prognostic factor for LRR-free survival (LRRFS) (p = 0.04; hazard ratio = 7.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–47.30). Patients with level of tumor ≤5 cm had an estimated 5-year LRRFS of 66.8%, which was much higher than 2.3% in patients with level of tumor >5 cm. There was no significant factor for recurrence-free survival or overall survival. CONCLUSION: In T3N0 rectal cancer, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy should be recommended in patients with level of tumor ≤5 cm for better local control. However, in patients with pT3N0 disease, negative resection margin, and level of tumor >5 cm, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy should be carefully suggested.
Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Humans
;
Multivariate Analysis
;
Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Rectal Neoplasms
;
Recurrence
;
Risk Factors
10.Less is more: role of additional chemotherapy to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer management
Radiation Oncology Journal 2019;37(2):67-72
Concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) has played the most important and central role in the definitive therapy for the patients with locoregionally advanced stage nasopharynx cancer. The addition of induction chemotherapy (IC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) to CCRT have been widely accepted with the rationale of improving distant control in the clinical practices. This review article investigated the role of IC and AC based on 11 recent meta-analysis publications, and found that the clinical benefits obtained by the additional IC or AC to CCRT, at the cost of the increased risks of more frequent and more severe side effects, seemed not big enough. More intervention is not always better, however, less seems frequently good enough. The author would speculate that ‘less is more’ and would advocate CCRT alone as the current standard.
Chemoradiotherapy
;
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
;
Drug Therapy
;
Humans
;
Induction Chemotherapy
;
Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail