Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 17, 2025

Therapy Testing in a Spheroid-based 3D Cell Culture Model for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Published on: April 20, 2018
Nomogram-aided individual induction chemotherapy regimen selection in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Hao Peng1, Lei Chen2, Yan-Ping Mao2
1Center for Translational Medicine, Precision Medicine Institute, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province 510080, China; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou 510060, PR China.
Objective:
We undertook this study to clarify how TPF, TP and PF induction chemotherapy (IC) regimens benefit for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients with different risk of disease progression.
Materials And Methods:
Patients with newly diagnosed, stage III-IVA NPC were included. A quantitative nomogram was built using the independent prognostic factors identified for disease-free survival (DFS). Patients were stratified into low-risk and high-risk groups by the nomogram. Survival outcomes and toxicities between different IC regimens were compared.
Results:
In total, 1647 (41.0%), 1123 (28.0%) and 1242 (31.0%) patients received TPF, PF and TP regimen, respectively. Consequently, 2253 (56.2%) patients were clarified as low-risk group and the other 1759 (43.8%) as high-risk group. Survival outcomes did not significantly differ between TPF, PF and TP regimens within the low-risk group. However, TPF was associated with significantly improved 3-year DFS (76.2% vs. 67.5% vs. 68.3%), overall survival (88.3% vs. 84.1% vs. 83.9%), distant metastasis-free survival (81.9% vs. 75.0% vs. 77.4%) and locoregional relapse-free survival (92.0% vs. 87.5% vs. 86.9%; all P < 0.05) compared with PF and TP within high-risk group. Multivariate analysis also confirmed these findings. Toxicity analysis showed that TP regimen has the highest percentage of grade 3-5 hematologic toxicities while PF regimen achieved the lowest percentages of overall grade 3-5 adverse events.
Conclusions:
Patients with high risk should receive TPF for better efficacy and PF may be a better choice for low-risk patients with regard to less grade 3-5 toxicities.
Related Concept Videos
Dosage Regimen Designs: Nomograms and Tabulations
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Dopamine Receptor Antagonists
Phenothiazines, such as prochlorperazine...
Dosage Regimen: Individualization
Drug Dosage Regimen: Overview
Typically, the starting dose and dosing interval are guided by the manufacturer's recommendations based on clinical trials conducted during and after drug...

