Results of treatment of patients with nasopharyngeal cancer after superselective chemoembolization of tumor vessels

Background. Radiation therapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NC) has a high incidence of fatal complications, which leads to absolute contraindications to External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT). Chemoembolization of a nasopharyngeal tumor significantly reduces these risks and allows for EBRT. The aim of this study was to assess response rate after chemoembolization and EBRT. Objective. To evaluate the response rate in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer treated with chemoembolization of tumor vessels and external beam radiation therapy in combination with chemotherapy.  

Methods. Prospective descriptive study was conducted. Patients with cT3–4, N0–2, M0 NC treated in April 2016 – March 2021 were enrolled. All patients had chemoembolization with doxorubicin’s microspheres followed by EBRT administrated once daily (2,0 Gy per fraction). Treatment response rate was assessed according RECIST 1.1 criteria in three weeks.  

Results. Twenty-one patients were identified. The median age was 47 years (IQR: 20–60). Tumors were staged as cT3N0M0 in 1 (4.8%) case, cT3N1M0 in 6 (28.6%) cases, cT3N2M0 in 5 (23.8%) cases, cT4N0M0 in 1 (4.8%) case, cT4N1M0 in 1 (4.8%) case and cT4N2M0 in 7 (33.4%) cases. There were the following histopathology types of NC: WHO type I (n = 1), WHO type II (n = 7) and WHO type III (n = 13). Fourteen (66.7%) patients had EBV-non-associated tumor and 7 patients were EBV-associated. Twenty (95.2%) patients had absolute contraindications to EBRT. All patients had chemoembolization. Complete response (CR) after chemoembolization was achieved in 3 (14.3%) patients, partial response (PR) was in 4 (19%) patients, stabilization was in 12 (57.1%), and progression was in 2 (9.6%) patients. All 21 patients had EBRT (median total dose 66 Gy [IQR: 60–72]).CR after EBRT was achieved in 17 (80%) patients and progression was in 4 (20%) patients.  

Conclusions. Chemoembolization provides acceptable response rate in patients with locally advanced NC and allows for EBRT. Further studies are needed to evaluate local control. 

1. Гранов А.М. Интервенционная радиология в онкологии: пути развития и технологии. А.М. Гранов, М.И. Давыдов. СПб.: Фолиант, 2013. 560 с. Granov A.M. Interventional radiology in oncology: Ways of development and technology. A.M. Granov, M.I. Davydov. St. Petersburg: Foliant, 2013. 560 p.

2. Таразов П. Г. Методы регионарной терапии опухолей различных локализаций. П. Г. Таразов. Практическая онкология. Том 16. № 4. 2015. С. 131–139.

3. Tarazov P. G. Methods of regional therapy of tumors of various localizations. P.G. Tarazov. Practical oncology. Volume 16. No. 4. 2015. P. 131–139.

4. Al-Sarraf M, LeBlanc M, Giri PG, et al. Chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy in patients with advanced nasopharyngeal cancer: phase III randomized Intergroup study 0099. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16 (4): 1310–1317.

5. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68: 394–424.

6. Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, et al. Global Cancer Observatory: cancer today. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer 2018. https://gco.iarc.fr/ today (accessed Dec 28, 2018).

7. Guo R, Sun Y, Yu XL, Yin WJ, Li WF, Chen YY, Mao YP, Liu LZ, Li L, Lin AH, Ma J. Is primary tumor volume still a prognostic factor in intensity modulated radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma? Radiother Oncol. 2012 Sep; 104 (3): 294–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2012.09.001.

8. Koukourakis MI, Giatromanolaki A, Sivridis E, Fezoulidis I. Cancer vascularization: implications in radiotherapy? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Sep 1; 48 (2): 545–53. DOI: 10.1016/s0360–3016(00)00677–5. PMID: 10974475.

9. Mao YP, Xie FY, Liu LZ, et al. Re-evaluation of 6th edition of AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma and proposed improvement based on magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009; 73 (5): 1326–1334.

10. Mikami Y, Tsukuda M, Mochimatsu I, Kokatsu T, Yago T, Sawaki S. Angiogenesis in head and neck tumor. Nihon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho. 1993 Apr; 96 (4): 645–50.

11. Rohde S, Turowski B, Berkefeld J, Kovács AF. Klinische und histopathologische Ergebnisse nach lokaler Chemoembolisation oraler und oropharyngealer Karzinome– Vergleich mit intraarterieller Chemoperfusion (Clinical and histopathological results after local chemoembolization of oral and oropharyngeal carcinoma–comparison with intraarterial chemoperfusion] [published correction appears in Rofo. 2006 Dec; 178 (12): 1266. Kovács, A [corrected to Kovács AF]). Rofo. 2006; 178 (10): 979–986.

12. Wu Z, Zeng RF, Su Y, Gu MF, Huang SM. Prognostic Significance of Tumor Volume in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Undergoing Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy. Head Neck (2013) 35 (5): 689–94. DOI: 10.1002/hed.23010.