The Lancet· 2018
Radiotherapy plus cisplatin or cetuximab in low-risk human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer (De-ESCALaTE HPV): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial
- 1,040citations
- 2018year
Short summary
In low-risk HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer, adding cetuximab to radiotherapy resulted in significantly worse 2-year overall survival (89.4% vs 97.5% with cisplatin) and higher recurrence rates (16.1% vs 6.0% with cisplatin), with no reduction in toxicity.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Severe toxicity (grade 3-5) did not differ significantly between cisplatin and cetuximab arms at 24 months (mean 4.8 events/patient in both).
- 2-year overall survival was significantly worse with cetuximab (89.4%) compared to cisplatin (97.5%) (HR 5.0, p=0.001).
- 2-year recurrence rates were significantly higher with cetuximab (16.1%) compared to cisplatin (6.0%) (HR 3.4, p=0.0007).
- Cisplatin plus radiotherapy is recommended as the standard of care for suitable patients.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal cancer, a disease affecting younger patients, is rapidly increasing. Cetuximab, an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, has been proposed for treatment de-escalation in this setting to reduce the toxicity of standard cisplatin treatment, but no randomised evidence exists for the efficacy of this strategy. METHODS: ). The primary outcome was overall severe (grade 3-5) toxicity events at 24 months from the end of treatment. The primary outcome was assessed by intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN33522080. FINDINGS: Between Nov 12, 2012, and Oct 1, 2016, 334 patients were recruited (166 in the cisplatin group and 168 in the cetuximab group). Overall (acute and late) severe (grade 3-5) toxicity did not differ significantly between treatment groups at 24 months (mean number of events per patient 4·8 [95% CI 4·2-5·4] with cisplatin vs 4·8 [4·2-5·4] with cetuximab; p=0·98). At 24 months, overall all-grade toxicity did not differ significantly either (mean number of events per patient 29·2 [95% CI 27·3-31·0] with cisplatin vs 30·1 [28·3-31·9] with cetuximab; p=0·49). However, there was a significant difference between cisplatin and cetuximab in 2-year overall survival (97·5% vs 89·4%, hazard ratio 5·0 [95% CI 1·7-14·7]; p=0·001) and 2-year recurrence (6·0% vs 16·1%, 3·4 [1·6-7·2]; p=0·0007). INTERPRETATION: Compared with the standard cisplatin regimen, cetuximab showed no benefit in terms of reduced toxicity, but instead showed significant detriment in terms of tumour control. Cisplatin and radiotherapy should be used as the standard of care for HPV-positive low-risk patients who are able to tolerate cisplatin. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. The Lancet, 2018 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Otorhinolaryngology
OtorhinolaryngologyMedicine