Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Duenas-Gonzalez, A.
Right arrow Articles by de la Garza, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Duenas-Gonzalez, A.
Right arrow Articles by de la Garza, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Annals of Oncology 13:1212-1219, 2002
© 2002 European Society for Medical Oncology

Concomitant chemoradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical carcinoma: results from two consecutive phase II studies

A. Duenas-Gonzalez1,2,+, C. Lopez-Graniel1, A. Gonzalez-Enciso1, A. Mohar1,2, L. Rivera1, A. Mota1, R. Guadarrama1, G. Chanona1 and J. de la Garza1

1 Departments of Medical Oncology, Gynecology, Radiotherapy, Pathology and Basic Research, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City; 2 Department of Genomic Medicine and Environmental Toxicology, Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico

Received 3 September 2001; revised 14 December 2001; accepted 16 January 2002

Abstract

Background: Randomized studies comparing induction chemotherapy followed by surgical resection with radiation alone found that the neoadjuvant approach produces better results. So far, this latter modality has not been compared with standard concomitant chemoradiation. The objective of this report was to compare the results of two consecutive phase II studies: neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery or chemoradiation for the unresectable cases versus standard cisplatin-based chemoradiation.

Patients and methods:

From February 1999 to July 1999, 41 patients with cervical carcinoma, stages IB2–IIIB, were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment consisted of three 21-day courses of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, followed by either surgery or concomitant chemoradiation for the non-operable cases. From August 1999 to December 1999, an equal number of patients having comparable clinicopathological characteristics were treated with six weekly courses of cisplatin 40 mg/m2 during standard pelvic radiation.

Results:

A total of 82 patients were analyzed. Both groups were similar with regard to age, histology, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, tumor size, pretreatment hemoglobin levels, parametrial infiltration and performance status. In the neoadjuvant arm the overall response rate to induction chemotherapy was 95% (95% confidence interval 88% to 100%). Twenty-three patients had surgery and 14 underwent chemoradiation. In the definitive chemoradiation study, 38 patients completed treatment, the median number of cisplatin courses was six for a dose intensity of 33 mg/m2/week. Doses to points A and B were 85 Gy (range 68–95) and 55 Gy (range 51–65), respectively. Chemoradiation was delivered in 44.6 (range 28–113) days. Complete response rates after all treatment were similar: 97% and 87% in the neoadjuvant and chemoradiation groups, respectively. At a median follow-up of 28 (range 2–33) and 24 (range 3–30) months, respectively, there were no differences in overall survival. To date, 15 and 13 patients in the neoadjuvant and chemoradiation groups, respectively, have died of disease (P = 0.8567).

Conclusions:

The results of this non-randomized comparison suggest that induction chemotherapy followed by surgery or chemoradiation is at least as effective in terms of response and survival as standard cisplatin-based chemoradiation. A randomized study is needed to confirm these findings.

Key words: cervical cancer, concomitant chemoradiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
A. Duenas-Gonzalez, C. Lopez-Graniel, A. Gonzalez-Enciso, L. Cetina, L. Rivera, I. Mariscal, G. Montalvo, E. Gomez, J. de la Garza, G. Chanona, et al.
A phase II study of multimodality treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer: neoadjuvant carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by radical hysterectomy and adjuvant cisplatin chemoradiation
Ann. Onc., August 1, 2003; 14(8): 1278 - 1284.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.