Comparison of acute XXXX associated with cetuximab-based bioradiotherapy and @entity902 -based chemoradiotherapy for head and neck @entity957 : A single-institution retrospective study in Japan.

@entity1 @entity137 @entity3136 @entity957 @entity33 @entity900 @entity20787 @entity902
CONCLUSION: Grade >=  3 @entity33 / @entity3136 and inability to feed orally were problematic for @entity1 undergoing cetuximab-based bioradiotherapy (BRT) as well as @entity902 -based chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Severe @entity33 / @entity3136 and @entity20787 should be addressed carefully in @entity1 undergoing cetuximab-based BRT as well. OBJECTIVES: The efficacy of cetuximab-based BRT in locally advanced head and neck @entity957 has been established. However, the safety of cetuximab-based BRT in comparison with @entity902 -based CRT is currently under investigation. METHOD: This study retrospectively analyzed 14 @entity1 undergoing cetuximab-based BRT and 29 @entity1 undergoing @entity902 -based CRT to compare the incidence of acute @entity137 . In the BRT group, an initial cetuximab loading dose of 400 mg/m(2) was delivered 1 week before the start of radiotherapy. Seven weekly infusions of 250 mg/m(2) of cetuximab followed during the definitive radiotherapy. In the CRT group, @entity900 was administered at a dose of 40 mg/m(2) weekly during the definitive radiotherapy. RESULTS: The BRT group had a higher incidence of Grade >=  3 @entity20787 than did the CRT group (43% vs 3%, respectively, p < 0.01). The incidence rate of Grade >=  3 @entity33 / @entity3136 was 64.3% and 41.4% in the BRT and CRT group, respectively (p = 0.1484), while the incidence rate of the inability to feed orally was 38.5% and 55.2%, respectively (p = 0.2053).
