RTOG 0522: Adding Cetuximab to Cisplatin – Chemoradiation (CRT) in Locally Advanced Head and NEck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (LA-HNSCC)

  • Design:
    • Phase III, 891 analyzable patients with stage III to IV HNSCC randomized to:
      • Accelerated RT + cisplatin (100 mg / m² D1 and D22) with or without cetuximab (400 mg / m² load then 250 mg / m² weekly)
    • Primary endpoint: 
  • Result (no efficacy gain, more acute toxicity):
    • 3-yr PFS: 
      • 61.2% (CRT) vs 58.9% (CRT + cetuximab)P = 0.76
    • 3-yr OS: 
      • 72.9% vs 75.8%P = 0.32
    • LRC:
      • No difference
    • DM:
      • No difference
    • Treatment delivery: 
      • Similar cisplatin given (mean 191.1 vs 185.7 mg / m²):
        • But more RT interruptions with cetuximab (26.9% vs 15.1%). PubMed
    • Toxicity signal:
      • Higher grade 3 to 4 mucositis (33% vs 43%), skin reactions (in- and out-of-field), fatigueanorexia, and hypokalemia with the triplet
      • Late grade ≥ 3 toxicity not increased PubMed+1
  • Biomarkers / subgroups:
    • p16+ OPSCC had better outcomes overall:
      • But no benefit from adding cetuximab (no predictive effect)
    • EGFR expression:
      • Did not distinguish outcomes:
        • An age interaction noted in exploratory analysis is not practice-changing PubMed
  • Exam / clinic pearl:
    • Do not “stack” an EGFR inhibitor onto standard cisplatin – CRT:
      • No improvement in OS / PFS / LRC and more acute toxicity
    • If a patient is cisplatin-ineligible:
      • Switch the partner (e.g., RT+cetuximab):
        • But don’t add cetuximab to cisplatin PubMed
  • References:
  • Bottom line: 
    • Adding cetuximab to cisplatin – CRT:
      • Does not help and harms tolerability:
        • Reserve cetuximab as an alternative when cisplatin cannot be given

Leave a comment