Evidence Hub

Analysis of Plasma Epstein-Barr Virus DNA in Nasopharyngeal Cancer After Chemoradiation to Identify High-Risk Patients for Adjuvant Chemotherapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Anthony T. C. Chan, E. Hui, R. Ngan, S. Tung, A. Cheng, Wai T. Ng, V. Lee, Brigette B. Y. Ma et al.

Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2018

52 participants · 242 citations

Abstract

Purpose The contribution of adjuvant chemotherapy after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) in nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) remains controversial. Plasma Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA is a potential biomarker of subclinical residual disease in NPC. In this prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial, we used plasma EBV DNA to identify patients with NPC at a higher risk of relapse for adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients and Methods Eligible patients with histologically confirmed NPC of Union for International Cancer Control stage IIB to IVB, adequate organ function, and no locoregional disease or distant metastasis were screened by plasma EBV DNA at 6 to 8 weeks after radiotherapy (RT). Patients with undetectable plasma EBV DNA underwent standard surveillance. Patients with detectable plasma EBV DNA were randomly assigned to either adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine for six cycles (arm 1) or observation (arm 2). Patients were stratified for primary treatment (RT v CRT) and stage (II/III v IV). The primary end point was relapse-free survival (RFS). Results Seven hundred eighty-nine patients underwent EBV DNA screening. Plasma EBV DNA was undetectable in 573 (72.6%) and detectable in 216 (27.4%); 104 (13.2%) with detectable EBV DNA were randomly assigned to arms 1 (n = 52) and 2 (n = 52). After a median follow-up of 6.6 years, no significant difference was found in 5-year RFS rate between arms 1 and 2 (49.3% v 54.7%; P = .75; hazard ratio for relapse or death,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 52 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free