Loading…

Concurrent cetuximab and postoperative radiation in resected high-risk squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck: A single-institution experience

Background Postoperative cisplatin and radiation is the standard of care for high‐risk squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). We have used cetuximab and radiation in the postoperative setting for patients deemed poor candidates for cisplatin. Methods We retrospectively identified 40 p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Head & neck 2016-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1318-1323
Main Authors: Araki, Daisuke, Redman, Mary W., Martins, Renato, Eaton, Keith, Baik, Christina, Chow, Laura, Goulart, Bernardo, Lee, Sylvia, Santana-Davila, Rafael, Liao, Jay, Parvathaneni, Upendra, Laramore, George, Futran, Neal, Mendez, Eduardo, Bhrany, Amit, Rodriguez, Cristina P.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Postoperative cisplatin and radiation is the standard of care for high‐risk squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). We have used cetuximab and radiation in the postoperative setting for patients deemed poor candidates for cisplatin. Methods We retrospectively identified 40 patients who received cetuximab and radiation for resected locoregionally advanced SCCHN between 2006 and 2013 at our institution. Results The 2‐year Kaplan–Meier estimates were: overall survival (OS) 41%, recurrence‐free survival (RFS) 34%, locoregional control 63%, and distant metastatic control 59%. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥1 predicted for inferior OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.43; p = .003), RFS (HR = 4.07; p = .007), and locoregional control (HR = 4.92; p = .04) in multivariate analysis. Conclusion Patients with resected high‐risk SCCHN treated with postoperative cetuximab and radiation have suboptimal therapeutic outcomes. Further study of the efficacy and cost‐effectiveness compared to radiation alone is warranted. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: 1318–1323, 2016
ISSN:1043-3074
1097-0347
DOI:10.1002/hed.24437