Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
8707285 | Oral Oncology | 2018 | 8 Pages |
Abstract
The median follow-up was 57.0â¯months and 55.0â¯months for the CTX/NTZ plus CCRT group and IC plus CCRT group, respectively. No significant differences were found between the CTX/NTZ plus CCRT group and the IC plus CCRT group in 3-year OS (95.5% vs. 94.7%, Pâ¯=â¯0.083), 3-year DFS (93.3% vs. 86.1%, Pâ¯=â¯0.104), 3-year DMFS (96.2% vs. 92.5%, Pâ¯=â¯0.243) and 3-year LRRFS (97.0% vs. 95.1%, Pâ¯=â¯0.297). Patients undergoing IC plus CCRT suffered from severe hematologic toxicity and diarrhea compared with those treated with CTX/NTZ plus CCRT. The combination of CTX/NTZ with CCRT is comparable to IC plus CCRT treatment in survival outcomes for locoregionally advanced NPC patients but has a better safety profile than IC plus CCRT treatment.
Keywords
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine
Authors
Mei Lin, Rui You, You-Ping Liu, Yi-Nuan Zhang, Hao-Jiong Zhang, Xiong Zou, Qi Yang, Chao-Feng Li, Yi-Jun Hua, Tao Yu, Jing-Yu Cao, Ji-Bin Li, Hao-Yuan Mo, Ling Guo, Ai-Hua Lin, Ying Sun, Chao-Nan Qian, Jun Ma, Ming-Yuan Chen,