A randomized trial between two neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols: CDDP + 5-FU versus CDDP + VP16 in advanced cancer of the head and neck

  • Authors:
    • Alain Prévost
    • Jean-Claude Mérol
    • Philippe Aimé
    • Karine Moutel
    • Françoise Roger-Liautaud
    • Salvador Nasca
    • Michel Legros
    • Paul Coninx
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: September 1, 2005     https://doi.org/10.3892/or.14.3.771
  • Pages: 771-776
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

We investigated a phase III randomized trial to compare efficacy and tolerance of CDDP + 5-FU to CDDP + VP16, both given intravenously in patients with unresectable advanced head and neck cancer. The 197 eligible patients were paired off successively on the basis of tumor sites and UICC stage. Comparisons were made through sequential closed plans. In 179 patients, tumor beds and cervical lymph nodes were irradiated, and 20 patients underwent salvage surgical procedures. Cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil showed a response (CR + PR) rate of 15% greater than that observed with cisplatin plus etoposide (α=0.05, power 70%). Complete responses played a major role in the CDDP + 5-FU regimen. Furthermore, we noted a higher cervical node regression with this chemotherapy combination. Because radiotherapy was administered after chemotherapy, we could not analyze the mean duration response for each protocol. No significant difference in survival existed between the two groups. Myelosuppression was the most frequent sign of toxicity observed, especially with the CDDP + VP16 regimen. Mucositis was rare with allopurinol protection. In the CDDP + 5-FU group, one patient had grade 4 cardiac dysfunction, and 3 patients exhibited unconsciousness that may be related to cerebral vascular damage. Thirteen patients died, with 8 cases related to septic shock (5 CPPP + VP16 and 3 CDDP + 5-FU). Cisplatin plus 5-FU chemotherapy showed a satisfactory efficacy and acceptable toxicity profile compared with CDDP + VP16, with caution to patients with a cardiac or vascular history. Although we could not show a benefit in survival with the CDDP + 5-FU protocol, this trial supports literature data and confirms that this regimen may be proposed as a first-line therapy in advanced cancer of the head and neck.

Related Articles

Journal Cover

September 2005
Volume 14 Issue 3

Print ISSN: 1021-335X
Online ISSN:1791-2431

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Prévost A, Mérol J, Aimé P, Moutel K, Roger-Liautaud F, Nasca S, Legros M and Coninx P: A randomized trial between two neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols: CDDP + 5-FU versus CDDP + VP16 in advanced cancer of the head and neck. Oncol Rep 14: 771-776, 2005
APA
Prévost, A., Mérol, J., Aimé, P., Moutel, K., Roger-Liautaud, F., Nasca, S. ... Coninx, P. (2005). A randomized trial between two neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols: CDDP + 5-FU versus CDDP + VP16 in advanced cancer of the head and neck. Oncology Reports, 14, 771-776. https://doi.org/10.3892/or.14.3.771
MLA
Prévost, A., Mérol, J., Aimé, P., Moutel, K., Roger-Liautaud, F., Nasca, S., Legros, M., Coninx, P."A randomized trial between two neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols: CDDP + 5-FU versus CDDP + VP16 in advanced cancer of the head and neck". Oncology Reports 14.3 (2005): 771-776.
Chicago
Prévost, A., Mérol, J., Aimé, P., Moutel, K., Roger-Liautaud, F., Nasca, S., Legros, M., Coninx, P."A randomized trial between two neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols: CDDP + 5-FU versus CDDP + VP16 in advanced cancer of the head and neck". Oncology Reports 14, no. 3 (2005): 771-776. https://doi.org/10.3892/or.14.3.771