Mortality rate with irinotecan/cisplatin plus concomitant radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15560-e15560
Author(s):  
G. Geib ◽  
M. W. Machado ◽  
B. Pozzi ◽  
N. S. Lazaretti ◽  
C. Dutra ◽  
...  

e15560 Background: The cisplatin/irinotecan doublet plus concomitant radiation therapy has been tested in phase II studies as a non-infusional alternative for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), showing good antitumoral activity and acceptable safety profile. Here, we describe our institutional experience with this combination, specially regarding its toxicity profile. Methods: A series of 26 patients with locally advanced, unresectable ESCC patients treated at our institution between September/2006-January/2008 is reported. Treatment consisted of cisplatin 30 mg/m2 and irinotecan 65 mg/m2 on weeks 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11 and 12, and radiation therapy (50,4 Gy, 1,8 Gy/day) on weeks 8–12. Study endpoints were tumor response rate (RECIST), safety profile (CTCAE v3), overall and one year survival. Results: The mean age of patients was 61 years, with stage III disease in 88% of cases and performance status (ECOG) 0–1 in 90% of them. Twenty patients (77%) were available for response, with complete response, partial response/stable disease and progressive disease seen in 40%, 45% in 15% of cases, respectively. With a median follow up of 20 months, the overall survival was 9,2 months and the one-year survival 34,6%. All patients were evaluable for toxicity, with severe (grade 3–4) nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia documented in 45%, 33%, 18% and 13% of cases, respectively. Notably, treatment related deaths were observed in 5 cases (19%), mainly due to infectious complications, which led to the closured of this protocol due to excessive toxicity. Conclusions: In spite of its promising antitumor activity, this treatment regimen cannot be recommended for routine use due to its unacceptable treatment-related mortality. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (31) ◽  
pp. 2537-2549
Author(s):  
Yang Yang ◽  
Hong Ge

The traditional treatments for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma include surgery and radiation as local therapies, then chemotherapy and targeted therapy as systemic treatments. These treatments, either alone or in combination, however, are not satisfactory because of limited efficacy and unfavorable toxicity, calling for new therapeutic strategies. In recent years, immunotherapy, a new weapon in the arsenal against cancer, has shown substantial clinical benefits in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, particularly ones with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Importantly, accumulating evidence suggests that traditional radiation therapy functions as a powerful adjuvant for immunotherapy by contributing to systemic antitumor immunity, resulting in reduced recurrence risk and improved survival of patients. Here the authors summarize the emerging data on immunotherapy- and radiation therapy-based treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and discuss the pros and cons of different combinations, aiming at a comprehensive understanding of the proper rationale for the design of effective therapeutic regimens.


2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 79-79
Author(s):  
C. Lin ◽  
C. Hsu ◽  
J. C. Cheng ◽  
C. Yen ◽  
H. Shiah ◽  
...  

79 Background: We investigated the efficacy and safety of adding cetuximab into twice-weekly paclitaxel/cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), followed by surgery, for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods: Patients with operable ESCC (T3N0-1M0 or T1-3N1M0 or M1a) were treated with paclitaxel (35 mg/m2 1 h on days 1 and 4/week), cisplatin (15 mg/m2 1 h on days 2 and 5/week), cetuximab (400 mg/m2 2 h on day -5, then 250 mg/m2 2 h on day 3/week) and radiotherapy (2 Gy on days 1-5/week). When the accumulated radiation dose reached 40 Gy, the feasibility of esophagectomy was evaluated for all patients. In patients for whom esophagectomy was not feasible, CCRT was continued to a radiation dose of 60-66 Gy. Results: Sixty-two patients with ESCC were enrolled, and the majority had T3N1M0 or M1a tumors by endoscopic ultrasonographic staging (94%). All patients received CCRT to 40 Gy. Forty-three patients underwent surgery, and 17 patients continued definitive CCRT to 60-66 Gy. Of the scheduled doses of paclitaxel, cisplatin, and cetuximab, 80%, 79%, and 99% were given, respectively. The intent-to-treat pathological complete response rate was 24% (15/62) (95% confidence interval: 13-35%). At the median follow-up of 13.3 months, the one-year progression-free and overall survivals were 76% and 63%, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 toxic effects were leukopenia (51%), neutropenia (15%), esophagitis (19%), and infection (12%). Grade 1, 2, and 3 skin rash occurred in 59%, 36%, and 2% of patients, respectively. Grade 1, 2, 3, and 4 hypomagnesemia occurred in 14%, 5%, 0%, and 5% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: Adding cetuximab to twice-weekly paclitaxel/cisplatin-based CCRT prior to esophagectomy is an active and tolerable treatment for locally advanced ESCC. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document