Evidence Hub

Aspiration pneumonia in head and neck cancer patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation from India: Findings from a post hoc analysis of a phase 3 study

Patil V, Noronha V, Shrirangwar S, Menon N, Abraham G, Chandrasekharan A, Prabhash K

Cancer medicine, 2021

536 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Background: There are limited data from low- to middle-income countries (LMIC) on the incidence, risk factors, treatment outcomes, and antibiotic susceptibility spectrum of aspiration pneumonia (AsP).

Methods: We conducted a post hoc analysis of a randomized control trial in which adult patients with locally advanced head and neck cancers had received 66-70 Gy of radiation combined with cisplatin 30 mg/m2 weekly for 6-7 weeks or cisplatin at the same dose with nimotuzumab 200 mg once weekly till the completion of radiation. The following data were extracted and analyzed-the incidence of AsP, time to the onset of AsP, risk factors, treatment outcomes of AsP, and its impact on progression-free survival (PFS), locoregional control (LRC) rates, and overall survival (OS).

Results: Out of 536 patients enrolled in the study, 151 (28.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 24.5-2.1) patients developed AsP. The median time to develop AsP was 39 days (95% CI 34-44). Only baseline dysphagia (odds ratio = 3.76, 95% CI 1.05-13.51, p = 0.042) was associated with a significant risk of development of AsP. Among the patients in which pathogenic organism was isolated (69 patients), gram-negative species was isolated in 63 patients (89%). Cisplatin at 200 mg/m2 or more was delivered in 312 (81%) patients in the non-AsP cohort versus 107 (70.9%) patients in AsP cohort (p = 0.014). There was no statistical difference in LRC (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.057; 95% CI 0.771-1.448), PFS (HR = 1.176; 95% CI…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 536 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