English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicities of nadaplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with stage IIA to IVA cervical carcinoma. Patients with an International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIA to IVA cervical carcinoma were treated with nadaplatin-based CCRT, using high-dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy (HDR-ICBT) or radiotherapy (RT) alone, in patients with FIGO stage IIA to IVA cervical carcinoma. CCRT with nedaplatin (80 mg/m 2 ) was administered on Days 1 and 29. The records of 17 women treated either with nadaplatin-based CCRT using HSR-ICBT (n=8) or RT alone (n=9), for stage IIA to IVA cervical carcinoma were retrospectively reviewed. The activity and toxicity were compared in the two treatment groups. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were the main endpoints. The 5-year overall survival rates in the CCRT and RT groups were 68.6 and 77.8%, respectively. The median OS of the CCRT and RT groups was 38.5 and 27.3 months, respectively. There was no significant difference in either PFS (P=0.618) or OS (P= 0.231). The most common grade 3-4 or higher toxicities in the CCRT groups were leuko-/neutropenia (37.5%). The frequency of acute grade 3-4 toxicity was higher in the CCRT compared to the RT group. However, no statistically significant difference was observed. Nedaplatin-based CCRT was safely performed. Although the prognosis of patients with FIGO stage IIA to IVA cervical carcinoma was not significantly improved, fewer distant relapses were observed in this treatment. Consequently, nedaplatin-based CCRT may be considered as a potential alternative to cisplatin-based CCRT in this patient population.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with nedaplatin in patients with stage IIA to IVA cervical carcinoma