Loading…

Is maximum primary tumor diameter still a prognostic factor in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated using intensity-modulated radiotherapy?

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has represented a technical milestone that has facilitated the clinical implementation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of maximum primary tumor diameter (MPTD) in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated using I...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:BMC cancer 2015-04, Vol.15 (1), p.305, Article 305
Main Authors: Chen, Yong, Hu, Xue-Feng, Wang, Yan, Chen, Hai-Yang, Yang, Lin, Liu, Li-Zhi, Cui, Chun-Yan, Liu, Dong-Sheng, Liang, Shao-Bo
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:Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has represented a technical milestone that has facilitated the clinical implementation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of maximum primary tumor diameter (MPTD) in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated using IMRT. Five-hundred and sixty-six patients with non-metastatic, histologically-confirmed NPC were retrospectively reviewed. MPTD was measured using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). All patients were treated using IMRT; 87.5% (456/521) of patients with Stage T3-T4/N1-N3 disease also received cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to identify the optimal MPTD cut-off point and examine the prognostic value of combining MPTD with the current T classification criteria. Median follow-up for all patients was 36 months (range, 1-52 months). The 3-year overall survival (OS), failure-free survival (FFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and local relapse-free survival (LRFS) rates for patients with a MPTD ≤41 vs. >41 mm were 96.1% vs. 85.4%, 93.7% vs. 74.7%, 96.1% vs. 79.7%, and 98.1% vs. 92.9%, respectively (all P 
ISSN:1471-2407
1471-2407
DOI:10.1186/s12885-015-1288-8