Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (sequential approach) in the management of head and neck cancer.

Jesus C. Fabregas, Arturo Loaiza-Bonilla, Toni N. Talebi, Sean Warsch, Gustavo Fernandez, Luis E. Raez, Edgardo S. Santos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Concurrent chemoradiation is considered the standard-of-care for locally advanced head and neck cancer of the hypopharynx, oropharynx and larynx, as well as unresectable disease. This paradigm was challenged by the introduction of induction chemotherapy (IC), which demonstrated non-inferiority in regards of overall survival (OS), along with increased organ preservation, when compared to the surgery and radiotherapy. More recently, IC followed by concurrent chemoradiation, the so-called sequential approach was developed in an attempt to decrease metastatic spread and improve locoregional control (LRC) rates, with much controversy amongst experts. A careful evaluation by a multidisciplinary team is necessary to recognize which patients should be offered this therapeutic approach due to a significantly greater rate of toxicity. Herein, we analyze the most current available evidence regarding the use of sequential therapy versus concurrent chemoradiation. Different factors including toxicity profile, adherence and patient characteristics play a major role in choosing the most appropriate treatment regimen.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1065-1072
Number of pages8
JournalExpert Review of Anticancer Therapy
Volume13
Issue number9
StatePublished - Sep 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Induction Chemotherapy
Chemoradiotherapy
Head and Neck Neoplasms
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms
Organ Preservation
Hypopharynx
Laryngeal Neoplasms
Standard of Care
Patient Compliance
Radiotherapy
Therapeutics
Survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Oncology

Cite this

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (sequential approach) in the management of head and neck cancer. / Fabregas, Jesus C.; Loaiza-Bonilla, Arturo; Talebi, Toni N.; Warsch, Sean; Fernandez, Gustavo; Raez, Luis E.; Santos, Edgardo S.

In: Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy, Vol. 13, No. 9, 01.09.2013, p. 1065-1072.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fabregas, Jesus C. ; Loaiza-Bonilla, Arturo ; Talebi, Toni N. ; Warsch, Sean ; Fernandez, Gustavo ; Raez, Luis E. ; Santos, Edgardo S. / Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (sequential approach) in the management of head and neck cancer. In: Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy. 2013 ; Vol. 13, No. 9. pp. 1065-1072.
@article{760a17f81255492c921647dabdf06904,
title = "Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (sequential approach) in the management of head and neck cancer.",
abstract = "Concurrent chemoradiation is considered the standard-of-care for locally advanced head and neck cancer of the hypopharynx, oropharynx and larynx, as well as unresectable disease. This paradigm was challenged by the introduction of induction chemotherapy (IC), which demonstrated non-inferiority in regards of overall survival (OS), along with increased organ preservation, when compared to the surgery and radiotherapy. More recently, IC followed by concurrent chemoradiation, the so-called sequential approach was developed in an attempt to decrease metastatic spread and improve locoregional control (LRC) rates, with much controversy amongst experts. A careful evaluation by a multidisciplinary team is necessary to recognize which patients should be offered this therapeutic approach due to a significantly greater rate of toxicity. Herein, we analyze the most current available evidence regarding the use of sequential therapy versus concurrent chemoradiation. Different factors including toxicity profile, adherence and patient characteristics play a major role in choosing the most appropriate treatment regimen.",
author = "Fabregas, {Jesus C.} and Arturo Loaiza-Bonilla and Talebi, {Toni N.} and Sean Warsch and Gustavo Fernandez and Raez, {Luis E.} and Santos, {Edgardo S.}",
year = "2013",
month = "9",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "1065--1072",
journal = "Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy",
issn = "1473-7140",
publisher = "Expert Reviews Ltd.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (sequential approach) in the management of head and neck cancer.

AU - Fabregas, Jesus C.

AU - Loaiza-Bonilla, Arturo

AU - Talebi, Toni N.

AU - Warsch, Sean

AU - Fernandez, Gustavo

AU - Raez, Luis E.

AU - Santos, Edgardo S.

PY - 2013/9/1

Y1 - 2013/9/1

N2 - Concurrent chemoradiation is considered the standard-of-care for locally advanced head and neck cancer of the hypopharynx, oropharynx and larynx, as well as unresectable disease. This paradigm was challenged by the introduction of induction chemotherapy (IC), which demonstrated non-inferiority in regards of overall survival (OS), along with increased organ preservation, when compared to the surgery and radiotherapy. More recently, IC followed by concurrent chemoradiation, the so-called sequential approach was developed in an attempt to decrease metastatic spread and improve locoregional control (LRC) rates, with much controversy amongst experts. A careful evaluation by a multidisciplinary team is necessary to recognize which patients should be offered this therapeutic approach due to a significantly greater rate of toxicity. Herein, we analyze the most current available evidence regarding the use of sequential therapy versus concurrent chemoradiation. Different factors including toxicity profile, adherence and patient characteristics play a major role in choosing the most appropriate treatment regimen.

AB - Concurrent chemoradiation is considered the standard-of-care for locally advanced head and neck cancer of the hypopharynx, oropharynx and larynx, as well as unresectable disease. This paradigm was challenged by the introduction of induction chemotherapy (IC), which demonstrated non-inferiority in regards of overall survival (OS), along with increased organ preservation, when compared to the surgery and radiotherapy. More recently, IC followed by concurrent chemoradiation, the so-called sequential approach was developed in an attempt to decrease metastatic spread and improve locoregional control (LRC) rates, with much controversy amongst experts. A careful evaluation by a multidisciplinary team is necessary to recognize which patients should be offered this therapeutic approach due to a significantly greater rate of toxicity. Herein, we analyze the most current available evidence regarding the use of sequential therapy versus concurrent chemoradiation. Different factors including toxicity profile, adherence and patient characteristics play a major role in choosing the most appropriate treatment regimen.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84898342382&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84898342382&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 24053205

AN - SCOPUS:84898342382

VL - 13

SP - 1065

EP - 1072

JO - Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy

JF - Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy

SN - 1473-7140

IS - 9

ER -