Impact of adaptive radiotherapy on survival in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy

• Published in: Radiation oncology journal 2024-03, Vol.42 (1), p.74-82
• Main Authors: Uchinami, Yusuke, Yasuda, Koichi, Minatogawa, Hideki, Dekura, Yasuhiro, Nishikawa, Noboru, Kinoshita, Rumiko, Nishioka, Kentaro, Katoh, Norio, Mori, Takashi, Otsuka, Manami, Miyamoto, Naoki, Suzuki, Ryusuke, Kobashi, Keiji, Shimizu, Yasushi, Taguchi, Jun, Tsushima, Nayuta, Kano, Satoshi, Homma, Akihiro, Aoyama, Hidefumi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Original
• ISSN: 2234-1900; 2234-3156; 2234-3164
• DOI: 10.3857/roj.2023.00374

To investigate the clinical significance of adaptive radiotherapy (ART) in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Eligible patients were treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy using IMRT. Planning computed tomography in ART was performed during radiotherapy, and replanning was performed. Since ART was started in May 2011 (ART group), patients who were treated without ART up to April 2011 (non-ART group) were used as the historical control. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). LRFS for the primary tumor (LRFS_P) and regional lymph node (LRFS_LN) were also studied for more detailed analysis. Statistical significance was evaluated using the log-rank test for survival. The ART group tended to have higher radiation doses. The median follow-up period was 127 months (range, 10 to 211 months) in the non-ART group and 61.5 months (range, 5 to 129 months) in the ART group. Compared to the non-ART group, the ART group showed significantly higher 5-year PFS (53.8% vs. 81.3%, p = 0.015) and LRFS (61.2% vs. 85.3%, p = 0.024), but not OS (80.7% vs. 80.8%, p = 0.941) and DMFS (84.6% vs. 92.7%, p = 0.255). Five-year LRFS_P was higher in the ART group (61.3% vs. 90.6%, p = 0.005), but LRFS_LN did not show a significant difference (91.9% vs. 96.2%, p = 0.541). Although there were differences in the patient backgrounds between the two groups, this study suggests the potential effectiveness of ART in improving locoregional control, especially in the primary tumor.