0 69

Cited 10 times in

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radiation for Inoperable cacinoma of the Maxillary Antrum: A matched-control study.

Authors
 Gwi Eon Kim  ;  Sei Kyung Chang  ;  Sang Wook Lee  ;  Hong Ryull Pyo  ;  Eun Chang Choi  ;  Jae Kyung Roh  ;  Ki Chang Keum  ;  Chang Geol Lee  ;  Chang Ok Suh 
Citation
 American Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol.23(3) : 301-308, 2000 
Journal Title
 American Journal of Clinical Oncology 
ISSN
 0277-3732 
Issue Date
2000
MeSH
Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use* ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/drug therapy* ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/mortality ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/radiotherapy* ; Case-Control Studies ; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant ; Cisplatin/administration & dosage ; Combined Modality Therapy ; Female ; Fluorouracil/administration & dosage ; Humans ; Male ; Maxillary Sinus Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Maxillary Sinus Neoplasms/mortality ; Maxillary Sinus Neoplasms/radiotherapy* ; Middle Aged ; Treatment Failure
Keywords
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy ; Radiotherapy ; Maxillary cancer ; inoperable
Abstract
A matched-control study comparing standard radiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation was undertaken to clarify the effects of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the maxillary antrum. Thirty-four patients with inoperable maxillary cancer were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (Group II). Before starting radiotherapy, all patients in Group II received two or three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisting of cisplatin and a 5-day continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil with or without intravenous injection of vinblastine. Radiation doses ranged from 66 Gy to 75 Gy (median, 70 Gy). The response rate, patterns of failure, toxicity, and survival for Group II were compared with those for 34 stage-matched patients treated with radiation alone (Group I). Despite a higher response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the recurrence rate and patterns of treatment failure were not influenced by the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In most cases, neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not interfere with subsequent radiotherapy, and radiation-induced late complications occurred equally in both treatment groups. After a median follow-up of 48 months, there was no significant difference in 5-year actuarial survival or disease-free survival between the two treatment groups. Radiation alone for inoperable maxillary cancer was clearly suboptimal for improving local control and survival rate, but neoadjuvant chemotherapy in addition to standard radiotherapy failed to demonstrate any therapeutic advantage over radiation alone.
Full Text
https://insights.ovid.com/pubmed?pmid=10857899
DOI
10.1097/00000421-200006000-00020
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiation Oncology (방사선종양학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Roh, Jae Kyung(노재경)
Lee, Chang Geol(이창걸) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8702-881X
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/171614
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links