Comparing efficacy and safety of weekly vs. triweekly cisplatin concurrently with radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is widely used in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer (HNC). The optimal dosing schedule, whether weekly or triweekly, has been a subject of debate. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of weekly versus triweekly cisplatin regimens in this patient population. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare outcomes associated with weekly and triweekly cisplatin regimens. The endpoints examined were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) and safety. This meta-analysis protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023461292). The analysis of survival outcomes demonstrated no difference between the two schedules in terms of OS, PFS, LRRFS and DMFS at 2 and 3 years and 5 years (except for 2 years LRRFS). The odds ratio of OS at 2 years was 1.02 (p = 0.87) at 3 years 0.90 (p = 0.46) and at 5 years 1.13 (p = 0.59), and for PFS at the OR 2 years was 0.97 (p = 0.85) at 3 years 0.87 (p = 0.30) and at 5 years 0.86 (p = 0.55). Triweekly was superior to weekly cisplatin in terms of short-term LRRFS (at 2 years), with an OR of 1.57 (p = 0.02). Both protocols were similar in terms of adverse events. Both weekly and triweekly cisplatin regimens show comparable survival outcomes and safety profiles in patients with head and neck cancers, except for short term LRRFS (at 2 years). These findings suggest that treatment decisions should be tailored to the patient's individual profile, including comorbidities and tolerability. Future studies should explore cumulative dosing and biomarkers to refine treatment strategies further. • There is no difference between the two regimens in terms of survival outcomes, except for 2 years LRRFS. • Triweekly was superior to weekly cisplatin protocol at 2 years LRRFS. • There is no difference between the two schedules concerning adverse events. • Treatment decisions should be personalized based on patient profiles, comorbidities, treatment tolerability and preferences.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Oral Oncology Reports
Published
2025-04-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oor.2025.100738
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.85
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparing efficacy and safety of weekly vs. triweekly cisplatin concurrently with radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

S. Omri, Mohamed Ichou, Yassir Sbitti, Mohammed Amine Saâd et al.
1 citations
Oral Oncology Reports
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
1.85
article

Comparing efficacy and safety of weekly vs. triweekly cisplatin concurrently with radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

S. Omri, Mohamed Ichou, Yassir Sbitti, Mohammed Amine Saâd, Tarik Mahfoud, Choukri Elm’hadi, Rachid Tanz, Imad Taleb, Khaoula Alaoui Slimani, Lamia Aalaoui, Mohammed Anouar Mokhlis, H.A. Traoré, Mohamed Réda Khmamouche, Sidibé Lamine, Hassan Errihani, Imane Chahbounia
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is widely used in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer (HNC). The optimal dosing schedule, whether weekly or triweekly, has been a subject of debate. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of weekly versus triweekly cisplatin regimens in this patient population. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare outcomes associated with weekly and triweekly cisplatin regimens. The endpoints examined were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) and safety. This meta-analysis protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023461292). The analysis of survival outcomes demonstrated no difference between the two schedules in terms of OS, PFS, LRRFS and DMFS at 2 and 3 years and 5 years (except for 2 years LRRFS). The odds ratio of OS at 2 years was 1.02 (p = 0.87) at 3 years 0.90 (p = 0.46) and at 5 years 1.13 (p = 0.59), and for PFS at the OR 2 years was 0.97 (p = 0.85) at 3 years 0.87 (p = 0.30) and at 5 years 0.86 (p = 0.55). Triweekly was superior to weekly cisplatin in terms of short-term LRRFS (at 2 years), with an OR of 1.57 (p = 0.02). Both protocols were similar in terms of adverse events. Both weekly and triweekly cisplatin regimens show comparable survival outcomes and safety profiles in patients with head and neck cancers, except for short term LRRFS (at 2 years). These findings suggest that treatment decisions should be tailored to the patient's individual profile, including comorbidities and tolerability. Future studies should explore cumulative dosing and biomarkers to refine treatment strategies further. • There is no difference between the two regimens in terms of survival outcomes, except for 2 years LRRFS. • Triweekly was superior to weekly cisplatin protocol at 2 years LRRFS. • There is no difference between the two schedules concerning adverse events. • Treatment decisions should be personalized based on patient profiles, comorbidities, treatment tolerability and preferences.

Oral Oncology ReportsVol. 14
Mohammed V University (MA), Military Hospital (PK), Institut National d'Oncologie (MA)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
1.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.