3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Oral Maintenance Chemotherapy Using S-1/Capecitabine in Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients After Systemic Chemotherapy: A Single-Institution Experience

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          In this study, we retrospectively evaluated a series of metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (mNPC) patients who received oral maintenance chemotherapy using S-1/capecitabine after systemic chemotherapy and local radiation therapy, and aimed to explore potential efficient treatment strategies for this subset of patients.

          Patients and Methods

          Thirty-seven patients with mNPC (19 newly diagnosed metastatic patients and 18 metastatic cases after definitive chemoradiotherapy) who received the treatment strategies mentioned above were analyzed.

          Results

          After a median follow-up time of 37 months, the 3-year progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) rates were 47.6% and 87.7%, respectively. The median time to progression was 27.6 months, while the median OS was not reached at time of last follow-up. The most common acute adverse events were hematological and gastrointestinal toxicity, and all were tolerable and curable.

          Conclusion

          Oral maintenance chemotherapy using S-1/capecitabine in mNPC patients after systemic chemotherapy could yield a superb outcome. Further multicenter prospective clinical trials are warranted.

          Related collections

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Capecitabine: a review.

          Fluorouracil (FU) is an antimetabolite with activity against numerous types of neoplasms, including those of the breast, esophagus, larynx, and gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts. Systemic toxicity, including neutropenia, stomatitis, and diarrhea, often occur due to cytotoxic nonselectivity. Capecitabine was developed as a prodrug of FU, with the goal of improving tolerability and intratumor drug concentrations through tumor-specific conversion to the active drug. The purpose of this article is to review the available information on capecitabine with respect to clinical pharmacology, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, clinical efficacy for breast and colorectal cancer adverse-effect profile, documented drug interactions, dosage and administration, and future directions of ongoing research. Relevant English-language literature was identified through searches of PubMed (1966 to August 2004), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1977 to August 2004), and the Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (January 1995 to August 2004). Search terms included capecitabine, Xeloda, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer. The references of the identified articles were reviewed for additional sources. In addition, product information was obtained from Roche Pharmaceuticals. Studies from the identified literature that addressed this article's objectives were selected for review, with preference given to Phase II/III trials. Capecitabine is an oral prodrug that is converted to its only active metabolite, FU, by thymidine phosphorylase. Higher levels of this enzyme are found in several tumors and the liver, compared with normal healthy tissue. In adults, capecitabine has a bioavailability of approximately 100% with a Cmax of 3.9 mg/L, Tmax of 1.5 to 2 hr, and AUC of 5.96 mg.h/L. The predominant route of elimination is renal, and dosage reduction of 75% is recommended in patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) of 30 to 50 mL/min. The drug is contraindicated if CrCl is < 30 mL/min. Capecitabine has shown varying degrees of efficacy with acceptable tolerability in numerous cancers including prostate, renal cell, ovarian, and pancreatic, with the largest amount of evidence in metastatic breast and colorectal cancer. Single-agent capecitabine was compared with IV FU/leucovorin (LV) using the bolus Mayo Clinic regimen in 2 Phase III trials as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Overall response rate (RR) favored the capecitabine arm (26% vs 17%, P < 0.001); however, this did not translate into a difference in time to progression (TTP) (4.6 months vs 4.7 months) or overall survival (OS) (12.9 months vs 12.8 months). In Phase II noncomparative trials, combinations of capecitabine with oxaliplatin or irinotecan have produced results similar to regimens combining FU/LV with the same agents in patients with colorectal cancer. In metastatic breast cancer patients who had received prior treatment with an anthracycline-based regimen, a Phase III trial comparing the combination of capecitabine with docetaxel versus docetaxel alone demonstrated superior objective tumor RR (42% vs 30%, P = 0.006), median TTP (6.1 months vs 4.2 months, P < 0.001), and median OS (14.5 months vs 11.5 months, P = 0.013) with the combination treatment. Noncomparative Phase II studies have also supported efficacy in patients with metastatic breast cancer pretreated with both anthracyclines and taxanes, yielding an overall RR of 15% to 29% and median OS of 9.4 to 15.2 months. The most common dose-limiting adverse effects associated with capecitabine monotherapy are hyperbilirubinemia, diarrhea, and hand-foot syndrome. Myelosuppression, fatigue and weakness, abdominal pain, and nausea have also been reported. Compared with bolus FU/LV, capecitabine was associated with more hand-foot syndrome but less stomatitis, alopecia, neutropenia requiring medical management, diarrhea, and nausea. Capecitabine has been reported to increase serum phenytoin levels and the international normalized ratio in patients receiving concomitant phenytoin and warfarin, respectively. The dose of capecitabine approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for both metastatic colorectal and breast cancer is 1250 Mg/M2 given orally twice per day, usually separated by 12 hours for the first 2 weeks of every 3-week cycle. Capecitabine is currently approved by the FDA for use as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer when single-agent fluoropyrimidine therapy is preferred. The drug is also approved for use as (1) a single agent in metastatic breast cancer patients who are resistant to both anthracycline- and paclitaxel-based regimens or in whom further anthracycline treatment is contra indicated and (2) in combination with docetaxel after failure of prior anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Single-agent and combination regimens have also shown benefits in patients with prostate, pancreatic, renal cell, and ovarian cancers. Improved tolerability and comparable efficacy compared with IV FU/LV in addition to oral administration make capecitabine an attractive option for the treatment of several types of cancers as well as the focus of future trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with reduced-volume intensity-modulated radiation therapy: report on the 3-year outcome of a prospective series.

            To evaluate the efficacy of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using reduced clinical target volumes (CTV) in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Between August 2003 and December 2006, 323 patients with NPC were treated with IMRT according to this institutional protocol. Presenting stages were Stage II in 63, Stage III in 166, and Stage IVA/B in 94 patients. High-risk CTV encompassed gross tumor volume and entire nasopharyngeal mucosa with a margin. A reduced CTV was delineated for the remaining subclinical regions adjacent to the primary disease. Uninvolved neck nodes were delineated according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) consensus excluding the deep jugular (i.e., lymph nodes in retrostyloid space above C1 vertebra) and submental nodes. Patients with locoregionally advanced diseases also received cisplatin-based chemotherapy. With a median follow-up of 30 months (range, 4-53 months), 12, 6, and 26 patients had developed local, regional, and distant failures, respectively. The 3-year estimated local control, regional control, metastasis-free survival, disease-free survival and overall survival were 95%, 98%, 90%, 85%, and 90%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that T-classification had no predictive value for outcome, whereas N-classification was significant for predicting metastasis-free (p = 0.005) and overall survival (p =0.006). Ten patients (7.8%) experienced Grade II xerostomia at 24 months after treatment. No Grade III or IV late-toxicities were observed. Two patients died of treatment-induced complications. The IMRT approach using a reduced target volume provided favorable outcome for NPC with acceptable toxicity. This strategy needs to be optimized and then tested in a prospective setting to learn whether further improvement can be achieved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Nasopharyngeal cancer: EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancer Manag Res
                Cancer Manag Res
                CMAR
                cancmanres
                Cancer Management and Research
                Dove
                1179-1322
                25 February 2020
                2020
                : 12
                : 1387-1396
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital , Fuzhou, Fujian, People’s Republic of China
                [2 ]Fujian Key Laboratory of Translational Cancer Medicine , Fuzhou, Fujian, People’s Republic of China
                [3 ]Key Laboratory of Systems Biomedicine (Ministry of Education), Shanghai Center for Systems Biomedicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University , Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
                [4 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital , Fuzhou, China
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Shaojun Lin Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital , No. 420 Fuma Road, Fuzhou350014, People’s Republic of ChinaTel +86 591-83638732Fax +86 591-83928767 Email linshaojun@yeah.net
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this work

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1524-7909
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9235-6287
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9817-7220
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7164-9761
                Article
                234271
                10.2147/CMAR.S234271
                7049279
                32158270
                0f459043-78f4-4c7e-8487-842e9150a70f
                © 2020 Guo et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                History
                : 12 October 2019
                : 25 January 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 2, References: 58, Pages: 10
                Funding
                This work was sponsored by the National Clinical Key Specialty Construction Program and Key Clinical Specialty Discipline Construction Program of Fujian, China. This research is also supported by grants from the Fujian Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers: 2018J01275, 2019J01194, 2019J01197 and 2019Y0061); Science and Technology Program of Fujian Province (grant/award number 2018Y2003); Startup Fund for Scientific Research, Fujian Medical University (grant/award numbers 2017XQ2050 and 2017XQ1213).
                Categories
                Original Research

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma,maintenance chemotherapy,systemic chemotherapy,s-1,capecitabine

                Comments

                Comment on this article