ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2014
Concurrent use of cisplatin or cetuximab with definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- The Cisplatin Total Dose and Concomitant Radiation in Locoregionally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: Any Recent Evidence for Dose Efficacy?Current treatment options in oncology · 2017Pooled it
- Survival, recurrence and toxicity of HNSCC in comparison of a radiotherapy combination with cisplatin versus cetuximab: a meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2016Pooled it
- ARTSCAN III: A Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Chemoradiotherapy With Cisplatin Versus Cetuximab in Patients With Locoregionally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021Trial
- Phase IIb, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial of GC4419 Versus Placebo to Reduce Severe Oral Mucositis Due to Concurrent Radiotherapy and Cisplatin For Head and Neck Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019Trial
- Review
- Tolerability and efficacy of simultaneously integrated boost radiotherapy in head and neck cancer treatment.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2026Article
- Real-world clinical outcomes in Japanese patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck treated with radiotherapy plus cetuximab: a prospective observational study (JROSG12-2).International journal of clinical oncology · 2022Observational
- Cetuximab and anemia prevention in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Article
- Induction Chemotherapy Followed by either Chemoradiotherapy or Bioradiotherapy in Laryngeal Cancer.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2021Article
- Disease-induced and treatment-induced alterations in body composition in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2020Article
- Comparative efficacy and safety of radiotherapy/cetuximabTherapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2020Review
- Comparing high-dose cisplatin with cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy in definitive concurrent chemoradiation setting for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC).Cancer medicine · 2019Article
- Radiomics and Machine Learning for Radiotherapy in Head and Neck Cancers.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
- HPV, hypoxia and radiation response in head and neck cancer.The British journal of radiology · 2019Review
- Article
- Inhibition of EphB4-Ephrin-B2 Signaling Enhances Response to Cetuximab-Radiation Therapy in Head and Neck Cancers.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2018Article
- Leukocytosis, prognosis biomarker in locally advanced head and neck cancer patients after chemoradiotherapy.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2018Article
- Polyfunctionality of CD4Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe goal of the present work was to compare outcomes of definitive concurrent cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with cetuximab-based bioradiotherapy (BRT) in locally advanced head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween 2006 and 2012, 265 patients with locally advanced HNSCC were treated at our institution with CRT (n = 194; 73%) with three cycles of cisplatin (100 mg/m(2), every 3 weeks) or BRT (n = 71; 27%) with weekly cetuximab. Patients receiving BRT had more pre-existing conditions (Charlson index ≥ 2) than the CRT group (p = 0.005).
resultsMedian follow-up was 29 months. In all, 56% of patients treated with CRT received the planned three cycles (92% at least two cycles) and 79% patients treated with BRT received six cycles or more. The 2-year actuarial overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 72% and 61%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis (MVA), T4 stage, N2-3 stage, smoking status (current smoker as compared with never smoker), and non-oropharyngeal locations predicted for OS, whereas BRT association with OS was of borderline significance (p = 0.054). The 2-year actuarial locoregional control (LRC) and distant control (DC) rates were 73 and 79%, respectively. CRT was independently associated with an improved LRC (2-year LRC: 76% for CRT vs. 61% for BRT) and DC (2-year LRC: 81% for CRT vs. 68% for BRT) in comparison with BRT (p < 0.001 and p = 0.01 in the MVA). Subgroup analyses showed that T4 patients benefited significantly from CRT (vs. BRT) in LRC, while T1-3 did not. BRT patients had more G3-4 skin complications (p < 0.001) and CRT patients had higher rates of feeding tube placement (p = 0.006) and G3-4 gastrointestinal toxicities (p < 0.001).
conclusionThis retrospective analysis showed a better LRC in locally advanced HNSCC treated by cisplatin-based CRT than cetuximab-based BRT, and a nonsignificant trend towards an improved OS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.