Comparing long-term efficacy and safety of GP versus TPF sequential chemoradiotherapy for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis

比较GP方案与TPF方案序贯放化疗治疗局部晚期鼻咽癌的长期疗效和安全性:一项倾向评分匹配分析

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of GP and TPF sequential chemotherapy regimens in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). METHODS: From 2005 to 2016, a total of 408 LA-NPC patients treated with GP or TPF sequential chemoradiotherapy were retrospectively included. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) was employed to balance the baseline variables. Survival outcomes and acute toxicities were compared between both groups. RESULTS: A total of 230 patients were selected by 1:1 PSM. At a median follow-up of 91 months, no significant differences were observed between the matched GP and TPF groups regarding 5-year overall survival, progression-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and locoregionally relapse-free survival (83.4% vs. 83.4%, P = 0.796; 75.6% vs. 68.6%, P = 0.301; 86.7% vs. 81.1%, P = 0.096; and 87.4% vs. 87.2%, P = 0.721). Notable disparities in adverse effects were identified, with higher incidences of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in the GP group while grade 3/4 leukopenia and neutropenia in the TPF group. Though not recorded in our cohort, combined with the FAERS database, thrombotic adverse reactions are a concern for the GP regimen, while the TPF regimen requires vigilance for life-threatening adverse reactions such as septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and laryngeal edema. CONCLUSION: No significant difference in long-term outcomes was observed between the GP and TPF sequential chemotherapy regimens for LA-NPC. Differences in adverse effects should be noted when choosing the regimen.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。