Evaluation of Clinical Response and Toxicities of Concurrent Weekly Cisplatin in Comparison to Weekly Paclitaxel with External Beam Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer (IIB-IVA)

Nahid Naznin Rinky *

Department of Radiotherapy, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Mukti Rani Datta

Department of Radiotherapy, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Dipok Saha

Department of Radiotherapy, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Sarker Md. Tanvir

Department of Radiation Oncology, National Institute of Cancer Research and Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Tannima Adhikary

Department of Radiotherapy, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Tanin Sultana

Department of Radiotherapy, Sir Salimullah Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Mohammad Ashraf-Us-Zaman Mahmud

Department of Radiation Oncology, National Institute of Cancer Research and Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

A. T. M. Shazzaeatur Rahaman

Department of Radiotherapy, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Mohammad Saiful Islam Pathan

Department of Radiotherapy, Mymensingh Medical College Hospital, Mymensingh, Bangladesh.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

This quasi-experimental study was performed in the Department of Radiotherapy of Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka for one year period from July 2019 to June 2020. The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare tumor response and toxicities of weekly cisplatin and paclitaxel along with External Beam Radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer. Sixty previously untreated female patients with histologically proven locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of cervix (stage IIB-IVA) were randomized into concurrent chemoradiation with weekly cisplatin and weekly paclitaxel group with thirty patients falling in each group. They were followed up for 3 months at the OPD. Treatment response and toxicities were assessed and compared between two groups. Majority of the patients in both groups were less than 50 years of age. The mean number of chemotherapy cycles was comparable with 90% and 80% of patients receiving 5 doses in arm A & B respectively. Nausea & vomiting were higher in cisplatin group. Diarrhea, allergic reaction, peripheral neuropathy & neutropenia were more in paclitaxel group. There was a complete response rate of 63.3% in cisplatin group and 56.7% paclitaxel group. There were only 3 patients who discontinued treatment (1 in cisplatin group & 2 in paclitaxel group) due to drug-related toxicities. This small prospective study shows that weekly paclitaxel was as effective as weekly cisplatin in concurrent chemoradiation for locally advanced carcinoma of cervix. So, paclitaxel can be used as an alternative to cisplatin in cisplatin contraindicated cases.

Keywords: External beam radiotherapy, locally advanced cervical cancer, toxicities, clinical response, efficacy


How to Cite

Rinky , N. N., Datta , M. R., Saha , D., Tanvir , S. M., Adhikary , T., Sultana , T., Mahmud , M. A.-U.-Z., Rahaman , A. T. M. S., & Pathan , M. S. I. (2024). Evaluation of Clinical Response and Toxicities of Concurrent Weekly Cisplatin in Comparison to Weekly Paclitaxel with External Beam Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer (IIB-IVA). Asian Oncology Research Journal, 7(1), 15–21. Retrieved from https://journalaorj.com/index.php/AORJ/article/view/88

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arbyn M, Weiderpass E, Bruni L, de Sanjosé S, Saraiya M, Ferlay J, Bray F. Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analysis. The Lancet Global Health. 2020; 8(2):e191-203.

DeVita Jr VT, Rosenberg SA, Lawrence TS. DeVita, Hellman, and Rosenberg's Cancer: Short Title. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2022.

Memon A, Bannister P. Epidemiology of cervical cancer. Uterine Cervical Cancer: Clinical and Therapeutic Perspectives. 2019:1-6.

Safaeian M, Solomon D, Castle PE. Cervical cancer prevention—cervical screening: science in evolution. Obstetrics and gynecology clinics of North America. 2007;34(4):739-60.

Tambaro R, Scambia G, Di Maio M, Pisano C, Barletta E, Iaffaioli VR, Pignata S. The role of chemotherapy in locally advanced, metastatic and recurrent cervical cancer. Critical reviews in oncology/hematology. 2004;52(1):33-44.

Kundu S, Basu S, Acharya S, Dastidar A, Roy AG. Chemoradiation in locally advanced cervical cancer: a randomized trial. Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology. 2008;29(04):12-8.

Zhu JH, Hu QC, Gu K, Shen C, Yang R, Ji SJ, Che QQ. Small cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix with cerebellar metastasis: A special case report with literature review. International Journal of Radiation Research. 2019;17(2):345-53.

Cetina L, Rivera L, Hinojosa J, Poitevin A, Uribe J, López-Graniel C, Cantú D, Candelaria M, de la Garza J, Dueñas-González A. Routine management of locally advanced cervical cancer with concurrent radiation and cisplatin. Five-year results. BMC Women's Health. 2006; 6:1-7.

Pecorelli S, Benedet JL, Creasman WT, Shepherd JH, 1994–1997 FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. FIGO staging of gynecologic cancer. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 1999;65(3):243-9.

Saraiya M, Ahmed F, Krishnan S, Richards TB, Unger ER, Lawson HW. Cervical cancer incidence in a prevaccine era in the United States, 1998–2002. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2007 Feb 1;109(2 Part 1):360-70. Brinton LA, Reeves WC, Brenes MM, Herrero R, DE Brilton RC, Gaitan E, Tenorio F, Garcia M, Rawls WE. Parity as a risk factor for cervical cancer. American Journal of Epidemiology. 1989;130(3):486-96.

Abdel-Latif RM, Anter AH, Hussein MA. Concurrent Weekly Taxol Versus Weekly Cisplatin with Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer. cancer.;16:351.

Muggia FM, Braly PS, Brady MF, Sutton G, Niemann TH, Lentz SL, Alvarez RD, Kucera PR, Small JM. Phase III randomized study of cisplatin versus paclitaxel in patients with suboptimal stage III or IV ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(1): 106-15