...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Oncology >Ototoxicity in a randomized phase III trial of intra-arterial compared with intravenous cisplatin chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer.
【24h】

Ototoxicity in a randomized phase III trial of intra-arterial compared with intravenous cisplatin chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer.

机译:在局部晚期头颈癌患者中,与静脉内顺铂化学放射治疗相比,动脉内随机III期试验的耳毒性比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

PURPOSE: Cisplatin concomitantly administered with radiotherapy is increasingly used in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. We aimed to compare the incidence of hearing loss between patients treated with intra-arterial high-dose cisplatin chemoradiation with sodium thiosulfate (CRT-IA) and intravenous high-dose cisplatin chemoradiation without sodium thiosulfate (CRT-IV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective analysis of hearing thresholds at low and (ultra-) high frequencies obtained before, during, and after treatment in 158 patients. Patients were randomly assigned for either CRT-IA (150 mg/m(2), four courses) with sodium thiosulfate cisplatin neutralization or CRT-IV (100 mg/m(2), three courses) without rescue. All patients received concomitant radiation therapy (RT; 70 Gy). RESULTS: CRT-IA resulted in approximately 10% less hearing loss at frequencies vital for speech perception, compared with CRT-IV (P < .001). In CRT-IA, fewer ears qualified for hearing aids (36% v49%; P = .03). However, in both treatment arms, the incidence expressed in National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (version 3) did not deviate (P > .14). Age, cumulative cisplatin dose, cumulative RT dose, and the considered frequency area determine the degree of hearing loss (P < .001). Cisplatin induced increasing hearing loss of 24% to 60% with increasing frequencies. RT induced hearing loss at speech frequencies of 9% to 12%. CONCLUSION: Depending on the criteria used to assess hearing loss due to treatment, differences in ototoxicity between CRT-IA and CRT-IV were found in favor of CRT-IA. It is desirable to specify hearing loss criteria toward frequencies vital for speech perception, and to refine grading scales to reveal subtle and clinically relevant dissimilarities in ototoxicity between different treatment protocols.
机译:目的:顺铂与放疗同时使用越来越多地用于局部晚期头颈部鳞状细胞癌。我们旨在比较使用硫代硫酸钠(CRT-IA)进行动脉内大剂量顺铂化学放射治疗和不使用硫代硫酸钠(CRT-IV)进行静脉内大剂量顺铂化学放射治疗的患者之间的听力损失发生率。患者和方法:我们对158例患者在治疗之前,期间和之后获得的低频和(高频)听力阈值进行了前瞻性分析。患者被随机分为硫代硫酸钠顺铂中和的CRT-IA(150 mg / m(2),四个疗程)或未经抢救的CRT-IV(100 mg / m(2),三个疗程)。所有患者均接受了放射治疗(RT; 70 Gy)。结果:与CRT-IV相比,CRT-IA在对语音感知至关重要的频率上导致的听力损失大约减少10%(P <.001)。在CRT-IA中,合格使用助听器的耳朵较少(36%对49%; P = .03)。但是,在两个治疗组中,国家癌症研究所不良事件通用术语标准(第3版)中表示的发生率均未发生变化(P> .14)。年龄,顺铂累积剂量,RT累积剂量和所考虑的频率范围决定了听力损失的程度(P <.001)。顺铂引起的听力损失随着频率的增加而增加了24%至60%。 RT导致9%至12%的语音频率下的听力丧失。结论:根据用于评估因治疗引起的听力损失的标准,发现CRT-IA和CRT-IV之间的耳毒性差异有利于CRT-IA。理想的是针对听力感知至关重要的频率指定听力损失标准,并细化分级量表以揭示不同治疗方案之间耳毒性的细微差别和临床相关差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号