31.05.2015 Views

NcXHF

NcXHF

NcXHF

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

PROGRESS IN HEAD AND NECK SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA<br />

patient test results; identifıcation of targetable molecular aberration;<br />

and the availability of a targeted drug known to inhibit<br />

the function of the molecular alteration. 39 Highthroughput<br />

sequencing technology provides the means to<br />

conduct a comprehensive analysis of all somatic alterations<br />

in the cancer genomes. However, interpretation of the large<br />

amount of genomic data that emerge from these genomescale<br />

investigations for the development of new therapeutic<br />

strategies requires the effıcient validation of genomic data<br />

and the characterization of mutations. It is important to determine<br />

whether the identifıed mutations are responsible for<br />

disease pathogenesis (driver mutations) or have been generated<br />

as the consequence of genomic instability but without<br />

obvious advantage to the cancerous cells (benign mutations).<br />

To address the challenge of fragmentation of cancer research<br />

in Europe that generates diffıculties in translating preclinical<br />

discoveries into benefıts that improve patients’ lives, the Eurocan<br />

Plus project aims for the establishment of a European<br />

platform for translational cancer research by linking comprehensive<br />

cancer centers and basic/preclinical research centers.<br />

39 The Eurocan Platform project was approved by the<br />

European Commission in 2010 and aims to develop a consortium<br />

for translational cancer research by linking 23 cancer<br />

research centers and fıve European cancer organizations.<br />

One of the most important aims is to promote personalized<br />

cancer medicine that is based on the better understanding of<br />

the biology of the tumor and normal tissues so that personalized<br />

treatment can be applied at an early stage of the disease.<br />

Furthermore, prevention strategies should be<br />

established in cancer biology to identify and target high-risk<br />

individuals.<br />

NASOPHARYNGEAL CANCER<br />

What Is the Best Treatment in Nasopharyngeal<br />

Carcinoma? An Individual Patient Data Network<br />

Meta-Analysis<br />

With the improvement in local control accomplished by more<br />

precise imaging and RT, the predominant pattern of failure for<br />

nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is distant metastases. Concurrent<br />

cisplatin and RT with or without adjuvant PF (cisplatin/<br />

fluorouracil) chemotherapy is the standard treatment approach<br />

for stages IIB and above disease. 1 The role of induction chemotherapy<br />

is not well defıned. MAC-NPC presented the results of<br />

network meta-analysis, which allows one to perform simultaneous<br />

inference regarding the treatments and select the best<br />

among them. 6 Nineteen trials of RT with or without chemotherapy<br />

in 4,806 patients with nonmetastatic NPC were identifıed,<br />

and updated individual patient data were obtained. Treatments<br />

were grouped in the following categories: RT alone (RT), induction<br />

chemotherapy (IC) followed by concomitant chemoradiotherapy<br />

(IC-CRT), concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), or<br />

concomitant chemoradiotherapy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy<br />

(CRT-AC). For the entire network, CRT-AC ranked as<br />

the best treatment in terms of OS, with a probability of 94%. 6<br />

The probability that either CRT-AC or IC-CRT was the best<br />

treatment was 97% for OS, 96% for PFS, 81% for locoregional<br />

failure-free survival, and 93% for distant metastasis-free survival.<br />

When the network was restricted to cisplatin-based trials,<br />

as a sensitivity analysis, CRT-AC and IC-CRT remained the best<br />

treatments regarding PFS and OS. 6 This network meta-analysis<br />

of the treatment of nonmetastatic NPC suggests that incorporating<br />

IC or AC to CRT may further improve the outcome in<br />

terms of tumor control probability and survival versus CRT<br />

alone. Of course, as the authors point out, these results should be<br />

validated by well-powered randomized trials.<br />

CONCLUSION<br />

HNSCC comprises a heterogeneous disease in terms of epidemiology,<br />

etiologic factors, and clinical and biologic behavior.<br />

HPV status is the most important biomarker in this disease. Research<br />

efforts concentrate on identifıcation of prognostic and<br />

predictive biomarkers for the personalization of treatment, deintensifıcation<br />

of treatment to reduce late toxicity in goodprognosis<br />

HPV subsets, and the discovery of new treatments<br />

in poor-prognosis HPV– HNSCC. Immunotherapy, such as<br />

checkpoint inhibitors, is being explored as treatment strategy in<br />

HNSCC in different settings. In Europe and the United States,<br />

research funding for new treatments in HNSCC is rather limited,<br />

and progress against this disease has been diffıcult. Intergroup<br />

efforts may allow the execution of large, randomized trials<br />

that will improve the outcome of this devastating disease.<br />

Disclosures of Potential Conflicts of Interest<br />

The author(s) indicated no potential conflicts of interest.<br />

References<br />

1. Pfıster DG, Spencer S, Brizel DM, et al. Head and neck cancers, version<br />

2.2014. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc<br />

Netw. 2014;12:1454-1487.<br />

2. Gillison ML, Koch WM, Capone RB, et al. Evidence for a causal association<br />

between human papillomavirus and a subset of head and neck<br />

cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:709-720.<br />

3. Chaturvedi AK, Engels EA, Pfeiffer RM, et al. Human papillomavirus<br />

and rising oropharyngeal cancer incidence in the United States. J Clin<br />

Oncol. 2011;29:4294-4301.<br />

4. Baxi S, Fury M, Ganly I, et al. Ten years of progress in head and neck<br />

cancers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012;10:806-810.<br />

5. Clement P, Gauler T, Machiels JPH, et al. Afatinib versus methotrexate<br />

asco.org/edbook | 2015 ASCO EDUCATIONAL BOOK<br />

e327

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!