Abstract
PurposeTo date, no guidelines have been proposed for the ideal treatment of postoperative larynx squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) patients with lymphovascular invasion due to a lack of similar studies. The present study was conducted to compare the survival and toxicity in LSCC patients with lymphovascular invasion receiving either postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) or postoperative chemoradiotherapy (POCRT). The results can be applied for more appropriate treatment of these patients.Patients and MethodsThree hundred eighty-eight eligible LSCC patients with lymphovascular invasion were enrolled in this retrospective study. Survival and treatment-related toxicities were compared in the POCRT and PORT group using propensity score matching (PSM) methodology (1:1).ResultsFive-year overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of all patients were 48.7%, 58.2%, and 56.0%, respectively. Significantly, higher RFS rates (P=0.040) were found in the POCRT group than the PORT group in the PSM cohort. In the multivariate analysis, higher OS, DSS, and RFS rates were observed in the POCRT group than the PORT group (P=0.049, 0.024, and 0.011 respectively). Patients in the POCRT group presented more acute toxicities than those in the PORT group such as hematological toxicities (25.0% vs 0.9%, P<0.001) and mucositis (35.0% vs 19.1%, P=0.002).ConclusionIn the context of no ideal treatment for LSCC patients with lymphovascular invasion, the present study proposes POCRT as a preferable modality compared with PORT, as POCRT was associated with higher RFS rates. Higher RFS, DFS, and OS rates were also observed in the POCRT group in the multivariate analysis.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.