Limited applicability and implementation of the international oncology treatments guidelines in low- and middle-income countries, an example from the Mediterranean area borders

The quality of cancer care in the modern era is based on a precise diagnosis and personalized therapy according to patients and their disease based on validated guidelines with a high level of evidence. During cancer patients' management, the objective is first to make an accurate diagnosis and then offer the best treatment, validated beforehand in a multidisciplinary board meeting, with the best benefit/risk ratio. In the context of many low- and middle-income countries, the limited available means do not allow an adequate offer, resulting in non-optimal patients' care. In addition, in many low- and middle-income countries, priority can be given to other types of disease than cancer, which may considerably reduce allocation of specific resources to cancer care. Thus, the limited availability of systemic therapy, radiotherapy machines, brachytherapy and technological development may come up against another difficulty, that of geographical distribution of the means in the countries or a lack of expertise due to insufficient training programs. For all these reasons, the implementation of the guidelines established in Western countries could be impossible for many low- and middle-income countries which, moreover, have to face a completely different epidemiology of cancers compared to developed countries. In this work, we will discuss through a few examples of common cancers on both borders of the Mediterranean area, the applicability of the guidelines and the limits of their implementation for optimal cancer care.

Radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer

Nasopharyngeal cancers are a rarity in France. Radiotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment, frequently combined with chemotherapy. The technical modality of radiotherapy is complex in this disease, which is located in the vicinity of numerous organs at risk. In this article, we will present the updated guidelines of the French society for radiation oncology (Société française de radiothérapie oncologique, SFRO) on the indications, and technical details of radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal cancers.

Volumetric modulated arctherapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Clinical efficacy and late toxicity

PURPOSE

We report our experience of 86 consecutive patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma who were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 86 patients with histologically proven primary nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with volumetric modulated arctherapy technique radiotherapy. Primary endpoints were local, regional, distant control, and overall survival, second endpoint was late toxicity.

RESULTS

The median age was 47.5 years (range: 13-79 years) with sex ratio 1.09. At diagnosis, rhinologic symptoms represented the most common clinical presentation, reported by 61 patients (70.9%). Almost 88.4% of patients presented non-keratinizing undifferentiated carcinoma histology (n=76). Most of the patients presented a locally advanced disease defined by stage III and IVa (95.3%). Therefore, 31 patients were treated by concurrent chemoradiation (36%), 52 patients received induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (57%), three patients received induction chemotherapy followed by exclusive radiotherapy (3.5%). and three patients treated with exclusive irradiation (3.5%). With a median follow up of 15.7 months (range: 4-33.3 months), nine patients died (10.4%), three presented local or locoregional relapse (3.4%), while nine patients presented distant recurrences (10.4%). The two years overall and disease-free survival rates were 88.7% and 83.1% respectively, locoregional control was 100% at 12 months and 96.2% at 24 months, and the two years distant failure-free survival was 86.7%. Time to relapse was the only prognostic factor in univariate analysis for overall survival in our study. The therapeutic tolerance was good with 61.7% of grade 3 and 2.3% grade 4 hyposialia respectively, 46.5% of otological disorders and no radionecrosis was noted.

CONCLUSION

Volumetric modulated arctherapy technique with concurrent chemoradiotherapy is an effective treatment for nasopharyngeal carcinoma with excellent overall and locoregional control without severe toxicity. Distant metastasis is the major site of failure, so induction chemotherapy added to chemoradiotherapy must be discussed in multidisciplinary consultation meeting because it significantly improved recurrence-free survival and overall survival, as compared with chemoradiotherapy alone.

[Individualization of dose and fractionation of radiotherapy for head and neck cancers]

Head and neck cancers comprise a variety of tumours depending on the sub-site, for which target volumes and the prescribed doses need to be individualized according to each patient's history and presentation. This article aims at describing the main factors involved in decision-making regarding dose and volume, as well as ongoing research. Contouring and treatment guidelines, use of altered fractionation, major prognostic factors, the role of Human papillomavirus and of functional imaging will be presented and discussed.

[Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal cancer: Southern Tunisian experience]

PURPOSE

A retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from 62 patients treated for non-metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma were analyzed by comparing two groups of patients: a first group of 32 patients treated with 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluoro-uracil every 21 days followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (weekly cisplatin 40mg/m² with radiotherapy 70Gy, 2Gy per session, 5 sessions per week) and a second group of 30 patients treated with the same concurrent chemoradiotherapy.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 53.5 months, neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed a significant reduction in the rate of a distant metastatic relapses (3.3% vs. 10%, P=0.03). No significant difference in disease-free survival at 5 years (65.6% vs. 68.8%, P=0.46) or overall survival at 5 years (68.8% vs. 73.3%, P=0.46) was noted between the two groups. Induction chemotherapy was associated with febrile neutropenia of 15.6%. During concurrent chemoradiotherapy, hematological complications were greater in the first chemotherapy group (53% vs. 33%).

CONCLUSION

Induction chemotherapy by docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluoro-uracil is a safe and effective option in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. A better definition of high risk of relapse group would optimize the indications of this chemotherapy in the therapeutic arsenal.