Details
Category: Volume 09 Issue 01 January 2021
Hits: 874

Title: Comparative Study of Response and Toxicities between Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Concurrent Chemoradiation versus Concurrent Chemoradiation Only in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Carcinoma Cervix (Stage IB2, IIB-IVA)

Authors: Dr Jannatun Nisa, Prof. Dr Qamruzzaman Chowdhury, Dr Shahida Alam, Dr Kamrun Nahar Tania

 DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v9i1.41

Abstract

Background: In Bangladesh majority cases of carcinoma cervix being diagnosed in advanced stage. This study was aimed to determine whether induction chemotherapy would improve disease control and clinical outcome of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy.

Methods: A quasi experimental study was carried out among 60 patients of histologically proven locally advanced carcinoma cervix patients at Radiation Oncology Department of National Institute of Cancer Research & Hospital, Dhaka from June 2016 to May 2017. Patients were accrued to arm A and arm B purposively to receive sequential chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiation or chemoradiation only.

Results: The mean age of the arm A patients was 49.1 (SD ± 8.65) years and that of the arm B patients was 50.5 (SD ± 7.99) years. Majority of the study subjects were from middle economic class. Most of the patients (arm a 50% and arm B 73.3%) were in stage IIB. Vaginal discharge (arm A 56.7% vs. arm B 60%), post-menopausal P/V bleeding (arm A 40% vs. arm B 43.3%) and irregular p/v bleeding (arm A 33.3% vs. arm B 43.3 %) were leading complaints. In arm A 17 patients (56.7%) showed complete response where in arm B complete response was noticed in 20 patients (66.7%); partial responses were 11 (36.7%) and 10 (33.3%) in the two arms respectively. No statistically significance was found between these two arms (p=0.526). Different treatment related toxicities like anemia, vomiting, leucopenia, enteritis, dermatitis were reported in the both arms which faded away with time. Most importantly there were no significant difference across the two arms in this regard.

Conclusion: Induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiation was non inferior in respect to relieving symptoms and achieving complete response than concurrent chemoradiotherapy only in treatment of locally advanced cervical carcinoma.

Keywords: Induction chemotherapy, concurrent chemo radiation, locally advanced carcinoma cervix.

References

  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013 [cited 2017 Oct 22]. Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr
  2. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures-2015. Atlanta, Georgia: American Cancer Society; 2015.p.23.
  3. National cancer control strategy & plan of action 2009-2015. Dhaka: Ministry of Health & Family Welfare; 2008. p. 32-33.Available from: http://www.ban.searo.who.int/LinkFiles/Publication_Cancer_Strategy.pdf .
  4. Hussain S.M.A. Comprehensive update on cancer scenario Bangladesh. South Asian J Cancer. 2013;2:279-284.
  5. Cancer registry report 2008-2010;National institute of cancer research & hospital; Dec 2013;3-15,32.
  6. Bosch Fx, de sanjose S. Human Papilloma virus & cervical cancer- Burden & Assessment of casualty. J Natt Cancer Inst Monegr 2003; 31: 3-13.
  7. Vincent T. Devita VT, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA. Cancer Principles & Practice of Oncology. 10th Philadelphia: Wolterskluwer Health; 2015.
  8. Halperin EC, Wager DE, Perez CA, Brady LW. Perez & Brady’s Principles & Practice of radiation Oncology. 6th Philadelphia: Lippncott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
  9. Pecoreli S., Zigliani L., Odeinio F. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix. Int J GynaecolObstet 2009; 105: 103-104.
  10. Cervical cancer: Survival rates by stage [Internet]. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2017 [cited on 2017 Oct 5]. Available from: http:// www. cancer.org/cancer/cervical cancer/ detailed guide/ cervical cancer survival
  11. Uma Singh, Neetu Ahirwar, Anju Kumari Rani et al. The efficacy and safety of neoadjuvent chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced carcinoma cervix. J Obset Gynaecol India. 2013 Aug; 63(4): 273-278.
  12. Rajshree Dayanand Katke, Rewadkar Mahesh Shivhar, Priyanka Pagare. Role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Clinical cancer invest J 2016;5:365-368.
  13. Osman M. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the management of locally advanced cervical cancer: A systemic review. Oncol. Rev. 2014;28(2): 250.
  14. Tattersall MH, Ramirez C, Coppleson M.A randomized trial comparing platinum-based chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy vs. radiotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1992;2(5):244-251.
  15. Sundorf K, Trope CG, Hogberg T et al. Radiotherapy and neoadjuvent chemotherapy for cervical carcinoma. A randomized multicenter study of sequential cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil & radiotherapy in advanced cervical carcinoma stage IIIB and IVA. Cancer 1996; 77: 2371-2378.
  16. Kumar L, Kaushal M, Nandy BM, Biswal S, Kumar A, Singh KR et al. Chemotherapy Followed by Radiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Randomized Study. Gynecologic Oncology 1994;54(3):307-315.
  17. Silvana C, Milena B, Laura M, Paolo B, Riccardo R, Paola F et al. Randomized Study Comparing Chemotherapy Plus Radiotherapy Versus Radiotherapy Alone in FIGO Stage IIB-III Cervical Carcinoma. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 1994;25(3);211-217.
  18. Chauvergne J, Rohart J, Henro JF et al. Randomized trial of initial chemotherapy in 151 locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix( T2b – N1, T3b, M0). Bull cancer. 1990; 77 (10):1007-24.
  19. Duenas-Gonzalez A, Rivera L, Mota A et al.The advantages of concurrent chemoradiation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical carcinoma. Arch Med Res.2002 Mar-Apr;33(2):201-2.
  20. Loizzi V, Cormio G, Vicnio M, Selvaggi L. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy: an alternative option of treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2008; 65: 96-103.
  21. Whitney CW, Sause WB, Bundy N. Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a gynecologic oncology group and Southwest oncology group study. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1999; 17(5):1339–48.
  22. David H Moore (2005) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for cervical cancer, Expert opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 4:6,859-857.
  23. Mariateresa Lapresa, Gabriella Parma, Rosalba Portuesi & Nioletta Colombo (2015) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cervical cancer: an update, Expert review of anticancer therapy, 15:10,1171-1181.
  24. National Comprehensive Cancer Network: cervical cancer Version 2.2013, http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician gls/pdf/cervical.pdf.
  25. Vikas Fotedar, Dr. Rajeeb K Seam, Dr.Manoj et al. Neoadjuvent chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in locally advanced carcinoma cervix: A prospective randomized study.IOSR journal of dental and medical sciences. 2013;4(6);pp58-63.
  26. Chiara S, Bruzzone M, Merlini L et al .Randomized study comparing chemotherapy plus radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in FIGO stage IIB-III cervical carcinoma. Am j clin Oncol, 1994 Aug, 17(4):294-7.
  27. Seoud M, Geara FB, Shamseddine A et al. Short duration neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy for advanced carcinoma of the cervix: results and prognostic variables. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2003;24(2): 163-8.

Corresponding Author

Dr Jannatun Nisa

MBBS, FCPS (Radiotherapy) Resident Surgeon, Department of Radiation oncology, Chittagong Medical College & Hospital