Next Article in Journal
Pathologic Implications of Radial Resection Margin and Perineural Invasion to Adjuvant Chemotherapy after Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Multi-Institutional and Case-Matched Control Study
Previous Article in Journal
Risk of Diabetes Mellitus after Radiotherapy for Gastric Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cancers
Volume 14
Issue 17
10.3390/cancers14174111
cancers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Treatment of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Sequential Challenge

by
Zhouying Peng
1,2,3,4,†,
Yumin Wang
1,2,3,4,†,
Ruohao Fan
1,2,3,4,
Kelei Gao
1,2,3,4,
Shumin Xie
1,2,3,4,
Fengjun Wang
1,2,3,4,
Junyi Zhang
1,2,3,4,
Hua Zhang
1,2,3,4,
Yuxiang He
3,5,
Zhihai Xie
1,2,3,4 and
Weihong Jiang
1,2,3,4,*
1
Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410008, China
2
Otolaryngology Major Disease Research Key Laboratory of Hunan Province, Changsha 410008, China
3
National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410008, China
4
Anatomy Laboratory of Division of Nose and Cranial Base, Clinical Anatomy Center of Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410008, China
5
Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410008, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Cancers 2022, 14(17), 4111; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174111
Submission received: 22 June 2022 / Revised: 19 July 2022 / Accepted: 19 August 2022 / Published: 25 August 2022
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma is one of the major causes of death among NPC patients. However, there are no international guidelines for the treatment of patients with recurrent NPC now. In this article, we summarize past publications on clinical research and mechanistic studies related to recurrent NPC, combined with the experience and lessons learned by our institutional multidisciplinary team in the treatment of recurrent NPC. We propose an objective protocol for the treatment of recurrent NPC.

Abstract

Recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), which occurs in 10–20% of patients with primary NPC after the initial treatment modality of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), is one of the major causes of death among NPC patients. Patients with recurrent disease without distant metastases still have a chance to be saved, but re-treatment often carries more serious toxicities or higher risks. For this group of patients, both otolaryngologists and oncologists are committed to developing more appropriate treatment regimens that can prolong patient survival and improve survival therapy. Currently, there are no international guidelines for the treatment of patients with recurrent NPC. In this article, we summarize past publications on clinical research and mechanistic studies related to recurrent NPC, combined with the experience and lessons learned by our institutional multidisciplinary team in the treatment of recurrent NPC. We propose an objective protocol for the treatment of recurrent NPC.

1. Introduction

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a squamous carcinoma of the head and neck with great geographical distribution and ethnic heterogeneity, which affects populations predominantly in Southeast Asia, with the highest incidence in southern China [1,2,3,4]. Radiotherapy is recommended as the main treatment for primary NPC, and with the development of integrated treatment techniques such as radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy and targeted therapy, the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate for NPC can reach 50–64%, but 10–20% of patients still experience recurrence after the first treatment and improvement of their disease [5,6,7,8,9,10,11].
According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, for patients with resectable head and neck squamous carcinoma who have received radiotherapy, surgery to remove the lesion or local radiotherapy is recommended after recurrence, while chemotherapy alone is usually palliative care for those who are not suitable for radiotherapy or surgery [12,13]. Finding optimal treatment strategies for patients with recurrent NPC to prolong their survival after recurrence and improve their survival and quality of life has been the concern of otolaryngologists and oncologists in recent years [14,15].
There are many high-quality publications that have compared the efficacy of various treatment options [16,17,18,19,20]. In this review, we have discussed the current issues and summarized the cutting-edge views on the diagnosis and treatment of recurrent NPC.

2. Clinical Symptom and Diagnosis of Recurrent NPC

The common clinical manifestation of recurrent NPC is blood accumulation in the nose or sputum, which is different from primary NPC, where the most common clinical symptom is neck swelling, while ear symptoms and headache are also more common [1,21]. In the case of recurrent NPC, it is not uncommon to have corresponding dysfunction of cranial nerves, muscles or adjacent organs of the nasopharynx after they have been invaded by the tumor [2,22]. Patients with cervical lymph node metastasis at the time of the first diagnosis are more likely to have a recurrence with a neck mass [6,9]. The 8th edition of the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging criteria for NPC are used as the latest standards for diagnosis in the clinic [23,24]. In contrast, the 6th or 7th edition of the TNM staging criteria for NPC is more commonly used by researchers in previous publications [6,7,9,25,26,27]. The 6th or 7th edition staging may be more applicable to recurrent NPC. According to these editions, NPC is characterized using the following stages: 1. rT1—tumor is confined to the nasopharynx; 2. rT2—tumor has invaded the nasal cavity, sinuses, parapharyngeal space, and/or adjacent soft tissues (internal pterygoid muscle, medial pterygoid muscle, etc.); 3. rT3—tumor has invaded the base wall of the pterygoid sinus; 4. rT4 tumor has invaded the intracranial structures, internal carotid artery, cranial nerves, orbit, parotid gland, external pterygoid muscle, and other adjacent tissues in a larger area. Figure 1 shows the common sites of tumor involvement in recurrent NPC. The gold standard for the diagnosis of recurrent NPC is pathological diagnosis [28,29]. Compared with primary NPC, the difference is that the main body of the lesion is not in the nasopharynx or nasal cavity, which are convenient for biopsy, but in the parapharyngeal space or adjacent muscular tissues or even in the intracranial area, where the traditional transnasal biopsy is not so applicable. Therefore, in the diagnosis of recurrent NPC, imaging has a higher impact. The most commonly used imaging techniques to evaluate the lesion before treatment are: high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) of the nasopharynx and skull base, enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the nasopharynx and skull base, and positron emission tomography CT (PET-CT) of the whole body.

2.1. High-Resolution CT

High-resolution CT examination has its advantages for the diagnosis of nasopharyngeal skull base disease, especially the malignant lesions, to determine the degree and extent of bone destruction. Compared with conventional plain scan and/or CT enhancement, high-resolution CT is more advantageous in discriminating bone destruction [30,31]. During the diagnosis of recurrent NPC, it is more helpful to identify whether it is tumor recurrence or bone and/or soft tissue necrosis after radiotherapy. If the carcinoma has recurred, the bone on CT will be predominantly eroded by the tumor tissue unless the lesion is extensive, and generally, the CT changes will be concentrated on a single bone. In contrast, if there is only post-radiation bone and/or soft tissue necrosis, it will appear mainly as “spongy” changes of extensive bone centered on the pterygoid bone on high-resolution CT. However, there is less evidence on tumor erosion and destruction of the bone, especially of the bone cortex to the point of discontinuity [32]. In cases of severe soft tissue necrosis, an “air bubble shadow” (Figure 2) is more often seen in the soft tissue shadow on CT scans [32].

2.2. Enhanced MRI

Enhanced MRI of the nasopharynx and skull base is essential for the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of recurrent NPC. Similarly to most malignant tumors, NPC has a high signal in enhanced MRI and generally a low signal in T1- and T2-weighted levels [33]. In addition to assisting in determining the nature of the lesion, another important role of enhanced MRI is to help clinicians predict the extent of the tumor invasion and observe the relationship between the tumor and surrounding important structures [34]. It is important to note that patients with a suspected possibility of tumor recurrence have generally received radiation therapy, and sometimes there is a post-radiation effect that causes non-tumor tissues to appear as high-signal images in enhanced MRI, which may affect the clinician’s diagnosis [35]. Enhanced MRI also plays an important role in the post-treatment review process [36]. Whether the patient receives radiotherapy again after recurrence or undergoes nasopharyngeal surgery, enhanced MRI of the nasopharynx or even the skull base should be reviewed regularly after treatment to monitor the disease progression.

2.3. PET-CT

With its advent and development over the last decade, PET-CT has a unique advantage in the diagnosis of malignant tumors, especially in monitoring local progression and distant metastases [37,38,39,40]. The PET-CT approach involves the use of radionuclide labeling of compounds involved in human tissue metabolism, signal detection, and then image reconstruction [41]. This is used to distinguish tumor tissue with relatively high metabolism from non-tumor tissues with low metabolism [42,43]. However, its limitation is that some inflammatory areas will also show high metabolic signals, which are more likely to interfere with the judgment [44]. Therefore, at present, PET-CT is still more often used to exclude distant metastatic foci.
For recurrent NPC, there are other methods for diagnosis and prognosis in addition to the diagnostic and differential roles of conventional imaging approaches described above. In recent years, some researchers have also explored radiomics-related differential diagnostic methods or means of predicting prognosis [36,45,46,47,48]. There have been many reports on the use of imaging histology in the diagnosis of head and neck tumors as well as imaging histology combined with molecular studies to explore the prognosis of malignant tumors. Peng et al. summarized the application of imaging histology in head and neck malignancies in the past 10 years [3]. The use of imaging histology in recurrent NPC has been less frequently published. Zhang et al. constructed a predictive model for recurrence-free survival after first treatment in patients with stage T4 primary NPC by extracting features from tumor regions in MRI findings for 360 patients with primary NPC and validating them with a training cohort [48]. Furthermore, a machine learning approach based on PET-CT was used to identify recurrence and inflammatory changes after NPC treatment [49].

3. Treatment of Recurrent NPC

For recurrent NPC, the main treatment options currently include surgical resection and re-irradiation with or without chemotherapy, while chemotherapy alone is generally recommended only for patients who are unable to undergo surgical resection or who cannot tolerate secondary radiation therapy [8,13,50,51]. For resectable recurrent NPC, the 2- and 5-year OS rates for salvage nasopharyngectomy ranged from 48.6% to 100.0% and 38.3% to 88.9%, respectively [17,52,53,54]. If re-radiation was performed, the 2- and 5-year survival rates were 44.3–77.7% and 27.5–57.2%, respectively [55,56]. It is clear that the prognosis in recurrent patients is poor compared to that in primary cases, regardless of the treatment modality applied [1]. In the last decade, with the development of multimodal treatments with different combinations of chemotherapeutic agents, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy, other viable treatment options are being provided for patients with locally advanced recurrent malignancies [57,58,59,60]. However, there are still no clear multimodal treatment options for patients with recurrent NPC due to the lack of strong evidence-based medical findings. By synthesizing the currently available research publications, we have summarized and outlined the main and newer therapeutic approaches currently available for recurrent NPC.

3.1. Re-Irradiation

Re-irradiation is a very important treatment for recurrent NPC, but it is also accompanied by difficulties and challenges [22]. The difficulty lies in the fact that the re-irradiation dose is difficult to control due to the toxic side effects after the initial treatment, and the dose must be tuned to achieve the effective dose value while minimizing the toxic effects after radiotherapy [22]. The scope and location of recurrent tumors are more “individual” than the primary tumors, with more adjacent important tissues and more difficulty involved in judging the imaging [2]. For radiologic oncologists, a balance must be found between prolonging the survival in patients with recurrent NPC and the development of severe post-radiotherapy toxic effects. With the advent and development of IMRT, Qiu et al. compared the efficacy of 3D conformal radiation therapy with IMRT for the treatment of locally recurrent NPC [61]. They found that IMRT had similar efficacy and lower incidence of toxic side effects than 3D conformal radiation therapy did.
In an international recommendation for the treatment of recurrent NPC using IMRT published in 2020, oncologists from around the world agreed that IMRT should be the preferred modality for radiotherapy of recurrent NPC, but have not yet completely rejected the availability of brachytherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy for small recurrent foci. This publication compiled some of the aspects of contention regarding IMRT for recurrent NPC, and a questionnaire was also distributed to more than 20 internationally recognized experts for their opinions. Then, the results were collected and weighed to draw relevant conclusions about the diagnosis and treatment. The consensus discussed the delineation of clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV), with the preferred CTV to be added to the gross tumor volume (GTV) with a margin of less than approximately 5 mm. In terms of the total dose of re-radiotherapy, the most commonly used total dose is ≥60 Gy, and the efficacy will be reduced if the total dose is less than 60 Gy. If the total dose of re-radiotherapy exceeds 68 Gy, there is no significant increase in OS rates, and it is more likely to have fatal complications [22]. This paper summarizes the use of IMRT for recurrent NPC in the last 10 years since its widespread use (Table 1). In recent years, with the development of various forms of novel radiotherapy, there have also been reports related to carbon ion treatment for recurrent NPC [62,63,64,65]. However, this type of treatment is not yet mainstream, and longer-term observations of efficacy will be needed to determine whether patients can benefit from this type of treatment in total.

3.2. Surgical Resection

With the development of surgical techniques and the increased understanding of the anatomy of the eustachian tube region by otolaryngologists, surgical resection of the tumor has become another important option for the treatment of recurrent NPC [77,78,79]. Surgical approaches include open surgical approaches such as transoral and maxillary external rotation and endoscopic transnasal approaches [80]. Li et al. conducted a meta-analysis of endoscopic versus open surgical treatment of recurrent NPC and showed that in patients with rT3, the 2-year OS rate was 67% versus 53% for endoscopic versus open surgical treatment, respectively [52]. Compared to open surgery, nasal endoscopic resection of nasopharyngeal lesions has the advantages of lower trauma, faster recovery, no postoperative facial scar formation, better functional protection, and lower cost. There is a lack of additional evidence to support that endoscopic nasopharyngeal tumor resection is necessarily better than open surgery. However, with the development of endoscopic techniques and surgical instruments, open surgery to remove nasopharyngeal lesions is gradually being replaced. For surgeons, it is also important to focus on how to develop indications for endoscopic surgery for patients with recurrent NPC. The criteria commonly used in current publications to consider the difficulty of endoscopic surgery are mainly rT stage and tumor invasion of the surrounding vital structures, with rT stage being shown in several studies to be an independent factor that can affect patient survival [7,9]. Most of the available studies have focused on nasal endoscopic surgery for recurrent patients with rT1–rT3 [6,16,20,78,79,81]. Liu et al. published a report on a total of 96 patients treated with rT1–rT3 nasal endoscopic surgery with 2- and 5-year OS rates of 89.9% and 73.8%, respectively [6]. Whether the surgery has a negative margin, or whether patients with a positive margin receive postoperative treatment, also has a significant impact on the patient’s prognosis [9,82]. In patients with rT4, which is a major challenge for both oncologic radiologists and ENT surgeons, there are not many summaries of nasal endoscopic resection of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma among the available publications, and the efficacy of surgery is significantly lower than that for patients with rT1–rT3. Publications by Wong et al. and Peng et al. reported 2-year OS rates of 66.7% and 35.6% for rT3–rT4 patients, respectively, showing that the survival rate for rT3–rT4 patients was significantly worse than that for rT1–rT2 patients [7,25]. We have summarized the publications on nasal endoscopic nasopharyngeal lesion resection for recurrent NPC reported in the last 10 years (Table 2).
It is evident that in patients with recurrent NPC in rT3–rT4, not only is the prognosis relatively poor, but the treatment challenges are greater, regardless of whether they are treated with re-radiotherapy or surgical resection. How to better prolong the survival in these patients requires surgeons who are familiar with the anatomy of the nasopharynx and have extensive surgical experience. Preoperative evaluation and postoperative monitoring are also very important. Especially in patients with recurrent tumors closely related to the internal carotid artery (ICA), preoperative vascular assessment and preoperative vascular pretreatment are extremely important to completely remove the tumor and to avoid intraoperative and postoperative fatal complications. At our institution, carotid endothelial imaging will be performed in these patients to determine the extent of tumor invasion more carefully. In patients with ICA invasion, a digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and balloon occlusion test (BOT) will be performed to evaluate the compensatory status of the healthy vessels in the segment with blockage of the affected ICA [91,92]. The affected ICA (already occluded) can then be removed along with the tumor [93]. If the BOT is positive, a neurosurgeon may be called in to assist with cerebral artery bypass surgery to replace blood flow to the affected ICA [94,95].

3.3. Chemotherapy, Targeted Therapy, and Immunotherapy

Chemotherapy is one of the most classical treatment modalities for malignant tumors, and depending on the type of tumor, chemotherapy can play a “leading” or “supporting” role in the treatment process [96,97,98,99,100]. For primary NPC, radiotherapy with chemotherapy is almost the accepted treatment modality, but the “role” of chemotherapy in the treatment of recurrent NPC is still debatable [101,102,103]. Currently, several publications have reported on the treatment of recurrent NPC using different chemotherapy regimens; many oncologists believe that for patients with rT1–rT2, retreatment with radiotherapy or surgery is an option. However, for patients with rT3–rT4 tumors, the radiation dose of radiotherapy alone is often not ideal for tumor volume coverage, and the 5-year survival rate is less than 35% [15,22]. In addition, when the tumor is close to vital organs and structures, the increase in radiation dose may trigger serious or even lethal complications after radiotherapy [104,105]. In order to allow the use of relatively safe and effective re-radiotherapy, some studies have shown that cisplatin, docetaxel, and fluorouracil (TPF) induction therapy is a wise choice [106,107]. However, it has also been suggested that poor compliance with cisplatin in some patients treated with TPF may necessitate new chemotherapy regimens to replace TPF chemotherapy regimens [108,109]. Nedaplatin (S-1) is considered a safe and effective treatment option for patients with recurrent NPC after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy [110,111]. The clinical trials of Chen et al. and Hong et al. showed the same results, and gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) chemotherapy regimens are increasingly considered as the first-line chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of recurrent NPC [112,113,114]. As for oral chemotherapy drugs, they are generally used when patients cannot tolerate intravenous drugs, and can also be used as a maintenance treatment option for patients with tumor.
Compared with chemotherapeutic agents, the use of targeted therapy and immunotherapy in recurrent NPC is relatively limited, and in most cases they are not used alone, but in combination with chemotherapeutic agents or radiotherapy to provide better benefits [115,116,117,118,119]. A clinical study published by Ng et al. showed that weekly IMRT with docetaxel plus cetuximab was shown to be effective in advanced recurrent NPC compared to TPF-induced chemotherapy, with a 3-year progression-free survival rate of 35.7% [107]. The results of a multicenter, double-blind phase III clinical trial published in Lancet Oncology in 2021 showed that the GP chemotherapy regimen plus camrelizumab had acceptable toxicity and was effective in prolonging survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic NPC, making it a promising first-line treatment option for patients with recurrent NPC [120]. Several ongoing clinical trials are available on the Clinical trials website (https://clinicaltrials.gov accessed on 22 June 2022), all of which are concerned with immunotherapy with or without IMRT.
The efficacy of chemotherapy in combination with immunotherapy plus endoscopic surgery for recurrent NPC has not been reported in the literature. A recent single-arm phase II clinical trial (NCT05011227, NCT04778956) was hosted by Fudan University Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat Hospital and First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University. They are recruiting patients with stage rT2 or higher resectable recurrent NPC with preoperative and postoperative immunotherapy alone or immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy.
Regardless of the treatment modality, it is inevitable that patients with recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer will experience adverse symptoms after treatment, but oncologists and otolaryngologists should minimize the occurrence of fatal complications such as nasopharyngeal hemorrhage. The summary of the complications after treatment of recurrent NPC in the past 10 years (Table 3) made it clear that certain complications such as nasopharyngeal necrosis, osteonecrosis, and bleeding cannot be avoided regardless of IMRT or endoscopic surgical treatment. Therefore, for patients with recurrent NPC, applying the principle of early prevention and early detection and treatment, as well as follow-up after treatment may have the effect of prolonging the survival period and improving the quality of survival. By summarizing our institution’s treatment experience and that found in the published studies, we developed a flowchart for the diagnosis and treatment of recurrent NPC with post-treatment management (Figure 3).

3.4. Biomarkers of Recurrent NPC

Radiotherapy plus chemotherapy is the first choice of treatment for recurrent NPC, and its effect is worthy of recognition, but tumor recurrence after re-radiotherapy is indeed the main reason for treatment failure. Guo et al. found that high expression of CCL2 was an independent prognostic factor for the survival of recurrent NPC without distant metastases, and that increased autocrine CCL2 secretion by tumors was positively correlated with protein phosphorylation, thus possibly enhancing the resistance of tumor cells to radiotherapy [121]. While ionizing radiation can induce tumor DNA damage, some small molecule drugs were experimentally shown to reduce the enrichment of NFBD1, RAD51, and BRCA1 at DSB repair sites by inhibiting NF-κB, thus slowing down DNA damage repair in tumor cells and improving radiotherapy sensitivity [122]. Autophagy of tumor cells is one of the most fundamental pathways leading to apoptosis, and it has been shown that NEDD8 can promote apoptosis through activation of caspase-3, caspase-8, caspase-9, and PARP, thereby increasing the sensitivity of tumor cells to radiotherapy and chemotherapy [123]. Liu et al. found that leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) in the cytoplasm of NPC tumor cells and its receptor LIFR were associated with NPC tumor recurrence and poor prognosis, and further mechanistic studies showed that it affected NPC recurrence and invasive metastasis through SRC/PXN/FAK, TKS5/CTTN/MMP2 and VIM/N-cad (Figure 4) [124,125,126,127]. However, the mechanism of recurrent NPC occurrence and development has not been studied in depth, and more unknown areas need to be explored by medical doctors.

4. Discussion

As a refractory disease, recurrent NPC requires multidisciplinary team involvement from diagnosis to treatment and individualized treatment plans based on the patient’s condition. Single types of imaging have difficulty in identifying recurrence and soft tissue necrosis in many cases, although the gold standard of pathological biopsy still exists. However, there are often cases of recurrence where it is difficult to clip a biopsy. This can indeed pose a considerable challenge to physicians when developing a treatment plan.
When developing treatment plans for recurrent NPC, it is necessary to consider the patient’s own tolerance of treatment to maximize the patient’s benefit. Especially in the case of advanced rT3–rT4 patients, there is a risk of ICA damage and ICA-related bleeding during treatment. This often requires a team of nasocranial surgeons, oncologists, interventionalists, and neurosurgeons to develop a treatment plan. It is also important to follow up patients with recurrent NPC after they have received re-treatment. Our institution requires that all patients who undergo surgical treatment in our department have reviews with enhanced MRI of the nose and skull base every 3 months for 1 year, or every 6 months for 3 years, and maintain the frequency of review every 1 year for 5 years and seek medical consultation promptly when new symptomatic changes occur. Since patients with recurrent NPC have undergone at least one radiation treatment, and some have even undergone re-radiotherapy, the moisturizing and drainage functions of the nasal mucosa are lost; therefore, long-term nasal irrigation and the use of nasal oil drops can be of great help to patients in reducing symptoms such as nasal dryness and headache.

5. Conclusions

The diagnosis, treatment, and post-treatment management of recurrent NPC pose a current challenge for oncologists and otolaryngologists. Thus, clinicians need to weigh the benefits and drawbacks of various treatment approaches for patients. For the treatment of recurrent NPC, the best approach is to develop a relatively standard and industry-approved treatment plan through a joint evaluation of the patient by the oncologist and otolaryngologist. On the basis of the standard treatment process, each patient will be treated according to his or her own personalized plan after optimization of the unified plan, in order to prolong the patient’s survival and improve his or her quality of life.

Author Contributions

W.J. conceived and designed the study. Z.P., Y.W., R.F., K.G., S.X. and F.W. acquired data, searched the publications, performed the analysis, and prepared the figures and tables. Z.P. wrote the main manuscript. Z.P. and Y.W. performed equal work. J.Z., H.Z., Y.H. and Z.X. reviewed the above. W.J. supervised the study. All of the authors reviewed the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82171118); Hunan Postdoctoral Program for Innovative Talent (2021RC2017), and Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province (2021JJ41027). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, the decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chen, Y.P.; Chan, A.T.C.; Le, Q.T.; Blanchard, P.; Sun, Y.; Ma, J. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Lancet 2019, 394, 64–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Xu, T.; Tang, J.; Gu, M.; Liu, L.; Wei, W.; Yang, H. Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Clinical Dilemma and Challenge. Curr. Oncol. 2013, 20, 406–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Peng, Z.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Jiang, S.; Fan, R.; Zhang, H.; Jiang, W. Application of radiomics and machine learning in head and neck cancers. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 17, 475–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Wang, Y.; Mo, Y.; Gong, Z.; Yang, X.; Yang, M.; Zhang, S.; Xiong, F.; Xiang, B.; Zhou, M.; Liao, Q.; et al. Circular RNAs in human cancer. Mol. Cancer 2017, 16, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Zhang, Y.; Chen, L.; Hu, G.Q.; Zhang, N.; Zhu, X.D.; Yang, K.Y.; Ma, J. Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Induction Chemotherapy in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019, 381, 1124–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Liu, Y.-P.; Wen, Y.-H.; Tang, J.; Wei, Y.; You, R.; Zhu, X.-L.; Li, J.; Chen, L.; Ling, L.; Zhang, N.; et al. Endoscopic surgery compared with intensity-modulated radiotherapy in resectable locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021, 22, 381–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Peng, Z.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Fan, R.; Gao, K.; Zhang, H.; Jiang, W. Preliminary Efficacy Report and Prognosis Analysis of Endoscopic Endonasal Nasopharyngectomy for Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Front. Surg. 2021, 8, 713926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Hao, C.-Y.; Hao, S.-P. The Management of rNPC: Salvage Surgery vs. Re-irradiation. Curr. Oncol. Rep. 2020, 22, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Li, W.; Lu, H.; Wang, H.; Zhang, H.; Sun, X.; Hu, L.; Zhao, W.; Gu, Y.; Li, H.; Wang, D. Salvage Endoscopic Nasopharyngectomy in Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Prognostic Factors and Treatment Outcomes. Am. J. Rhinol. Allergy 2020, 35, 458–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chan, J.Y.W.; Wei, W.I. Three-dimensional endoscopy for endoscopic salvage nasopharyngectomy: Preliminary report of experience. Laryngoscope 2017, 128, 1386–1391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, Y.-P.; Lv, X.; Zou, X.; Hua, Y.-J.; You, R.; Yang, Q.; Xia, L.; Guo, S.-Y.; Hu, W.; Zhang, M.-X.; et al. Minimally invasive surgery alone compared with intensity-modulated radiotherapy for primary stage I nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Commun. 2019, 39, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Pfister, D.G.; Spencer, S.; Adelstein, D.; Adkins, D.; Anzai, Y.; Brizel, D.M.; Darlow, S.D. Head and Neck Cancers, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer. Netw. 2020, 18, 873–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Chan, J.Y.W. Surgical management of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Oral Oncol. 2014, 50, 913–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Prawira, A.; Oosting, S.F.; Chen, T.W.; Santos, K.A.D.; Saluja, R.; Wang, L.; Siu, L.L.; Chan, K.K.W.; Hansen, A.R. Systemic therapies for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A systematic review. Br. J. Cancer 2017, 117, 1743–1752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Lee, A.W.; Ng, W.T.; Chan, J.Y.; Corry, J.; Mäkitie, A.; Mendenhall, W.M.; Rinaldo, A.; Rodrigo, J.P.; Saba, N.F.; Strojan, P.; et al. Management of locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Treat. Rev. 2019, 79, 101890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. You, R.; Zou, X.; Hua, Y.-J.; Han, F.; Li, L.; Zhao, C.; Hong, M.-H.; Chen, M.-Y. Salvage endoscopic nasopharyngectomy is superior to intensity-modulated radiation therapy for local recurrence of selected T1–T3 nasopharyngeal carcinoma–A case-matched comparison. Radiother. Oncol. 2015, 115, 399–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Peng, Z.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Fan, R.; Gao, K.; Zhang, H.; Jiang, W. Comparing the Effectiveness of Endoscopic Surgeries with Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Recurrent rT3 and rT4 Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis. Front. Oncol. 2021, 11, 703954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Wei, W.I.; Kwong, D.L. Recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Surgical salvage vs. additional chemoradiation. Curr. Opin. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2011, 19, 82–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Weng, J.; Wei, J.; Si, J.; Qin, Y.; Li, M.; Liu, F.; Si, Y.; Su, J. Clinical outcomes of residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with endoscopic nasopharyngectomy plus chemoradiotherapy or with chemoradiotherapy alone: A retrospective study. PeerJ 2017, 5, 3912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zou, X.; Han, F.; Ma, W.-J.; Deng, M.-Q.; Jiang, R.; Guo, L.; Liu, Q.; Mai, H.-Q.; Hong, M.-H.; Chen, M.-Y. Salvage endoscopic nasopharyngectomy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy in treating locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Head Neck 2014, 37, 1108–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ng, W.T.; Corry, J.; Langendijk, J.A.; Lee, A.W.; Mäkitie, A.; Mendenhall, W.M.; Rinaldo, A.; Rodrigo, J.P.; Saba, N.F.; Smee, R.; et al. Current management of stage IV nasopharyngeal carcinoma without distant metastasis. Cancer Treat. Rev. 2020, 85, 101995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Ng, W.T.; Soong, Y.L.; Ahn, Y.C.; AlHussain, H.; Choi, H.C.; Corry, J.; Grégoire, V.; Harrington, K.J.; Hu, C.S.; Jensen, K.; et al. International Recommendations on Reirradiation by Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2021, 110, 682–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Pan, X.X.; Tong, L.H.; Chen, Y.F.; Li, F.L.; Tang, W.B.; Liu, Y.J.; Yang, W. A simplified T classification based on the 8th edition of the UICC/AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Manag. Res. 2019, 11, 3163–3169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. OuYang, P.-Y.; You, K.-Y.; Zhang, L.-N.; Xiao, Y.; Zhang, X.-M.; Xie, F.-Y. External validity of a prognostic nomogram for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma based on the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system: A retrospective cohort study. Cancer Commun. 2018, 38, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wong, E.H.C.; Liew, Y.T.; Loong, S.P.; Prepageran, N. Five-year Survival Data on the Role of Endoscopic Endonasal Nasopharyngectomy in Advanced Recurrent rT3 and rT4 Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 2019, 129, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Tang, I.P.; Ngui, L.X.; Ramachandran, K.; Lim, L.Y.; Voon, P.J.; Yu, K.L.; Narayanan, P.; Carrau, R. A 4-year review of surgical and oncological outcomes of endoscopic endonasal transpterygoid nasopharyngectomy in salvaging locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Eur. Arch. Otorhinol. 2019, 276, 2475–2482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Wong, E.H.C.; Liew, Y.T.; Lim, E.Y.L.; Abu Bakar, M.Z.; Prepageran, N. A preliminary report on the role of endoscopic endonasal nasopharyngectomy in recurrent rT3 and rT4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Eur. Arch. Otorhinol. 2016, 274, 275–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Du, D.; Feng, H.; Lv, W.; Ashrafinia, S.; Yuan, Q.; Wang, Q.; Yang, W.; Feng, Q.; Chen, W.; Rahmim, A.; et al. Machine Learning Methods for Optimal Radiomics-Based Differentiation Between Recurrence and Inflammation: Application to Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Post-therapy PET/CT Images. Mol. Imaging Biol. 2019, 22, 730–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Qiu, S.; Lin, S.; Tham, I.W.; Pan, J.; Lu, J.; Lu, J.J. Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy in the Salvage of Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2012, 83, 676–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Miyata, T.; Yanagawa, M.; Hata, A.; Honda, O.; Yoshida, Y.; Kikuchi, N.; Tsubamoto, M.; Tsukagoshi, S.; Uranishi, A.; Tomiyama, N. Influence of field of view size on image quality: Ultra-high-resolution CT vs. conventional high-resolution CT. Eur. Radiol. 2020, 30, 3324–3333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Vikgren, J.; Båth, M.; Johnsson, A.; Flinck, A.; Milde, H.; Thilander-Klang, A.; Kheddache, S. High-resolution computed tomography with single-slice computed tomography and 16-channel multidetector computed tomography: A comparison regarding visibility and motion artifacts. Acta Radiol. 2007, 48, 956–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Zhang, H.; Gao, K.L.; Xie, Z.H.; Zhang, J.Y.; Fan, R.H.; Wang, F.J.; Xie, S.M.; Jiang, W.H. Clinical study on endoscopic surgery for soft tissue necrosis of cranial base after radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi 2021, 56, 26–32. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ng, S.H.; Chang, J.T.C.; Ko, S.F.; Wan, Y.L.; Tang, L.M.; Chen, W.C. MRI in recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Neuroradiology 1999, 41, 855–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Olmi, P.; Fallai, C.; Colagrande, S.; Giannardi, G. Staging and follow-up of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Magnetic resonance imaging versus computerized tomography. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1995, 32, 795–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Parlak, S.; Yazici, G.; Dolgun, A.; Ozgen, B. The evolution of bone marrow signal changes at the skull base in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients treated with radiation therapy. Radiol. Med. 2021, 126, 818–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Meng, K.; Tey, J.; Ho, F.C.H.; Asim, H.; Cheo, T. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in determining treatment response and local recurrence in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated curatively. BMC Cancer 2020, 20, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Ulaner, G.A.; Bodei, L. Hepatocellular Carcinoma Mimicking Neuroendocrine Tumor Metastasis on 68Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT. Clin. Nucl. Med. 2019, 44, 330–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Nguyen, B.D.; Seetharam, M.; Ocal, T.I. 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging of Trichoblastic Carcinoma with Nodal Metastasis. Clin. Nucl. Med. 2019, 44, e423–e424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lim, W.S.; Oh, J.S.; Roh, J.-L.; Kim, J.S.; Kim, S.-J.; Choi, S.-H.; Nam, S.Y.; Kim, S.Y. Prediction of distant metastasis and survival in adenoid cystic carcinoma using quantitative 18 F-FDG PET/CT measurements. Oral Oncol. 2017, 77, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, G.-M.; Liu, D.-F.; Xu, Y.-P.; Meng, T.; Zhu, F. PET/CT imaging in diagnosing lymph node metastasis of esophageal carcinoma and its comparison with pathological findings. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2016, 20, 1495–1500. [Google Scholar]
  41. Rahmim, A.; Lodge, M.A.; Karakatsanis, N.A.; Panin, V.Y.; Zhou, Y.; McMillan, A.; Cho, S.; Zaidi, H.; Casey, M.E.; Wahl, R.L. Dynamic whole-body PET imaging: Principles, potentials and applications. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2018, 46, 501–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Kroenke, M.; Mirzoyan, L.; Horn, T.; Peeken, J.C.; Wurzer, A.; Wester, H.J.; Rauscher, I. Matched-Pair Comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-11 and 18F-rhPSMA-7 PET/CT in Patients with Primary and Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer: Frequency of Non-Tumor-Related Uptake and Tumor Positivity. J. Nucl. Med. 2021, 62, 1082–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yusufaly, T.; Zou, J.; Nelson, T.; Williamson, C.; Simon, A.; Singhal, M.; Mell, L.K. Improved Prognosis of Treatment Failure in Cervical Cancer with Non-Tumor Positron Emission Tomography / Computed Tomography Radiomics. J. Nucl. Med. 2021, 63, 1087–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Perlman, S.B.; Hall, B.S.; Reichelderfer, M. PET/CT Imaging of Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Semin. Nucl. Med. 2013, 43, 420–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Ma, B.; Hui, E.P.; King, A.; Leung, S.F.; Kam, M.K.; Mo, F.; Li, L.; Wang, K.; Loong, H.; Wong, A.; et al. Prospective evaluation of plasma Epstein–Barr virus DNA clearance and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission scan in assessing early response to chemotherapy in patients with advanced or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Br. J. Cancer 2018, 118, 1051–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Zhao, L.; Pang, Y.; Zheng, H.; Han, C.; Gu, J.; Sun, L.; Wu, H.; Wu, S.; Lin, Q.; Chen, H. Clinical utility of [68Ga]Ga-labeled fibroblast activation protein inhibitor (FAPI) positron emission tomography/computed tomography for primary staging and recurrence detection in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Eur. J. Med. Imaging 2021, 48, 3606–3617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Zhang, L.; Wang, W.; Hu, J.; Lu, J.; Kong, L. RBE-weighted dose conversions for patients with recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma receiving carbon-ion radiotherapy from the local effect model to the microdosimetric kinetic model. Radiat. Oncol. 2020, 15, 277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zhang, L.-L.; Huang, M.-Y.; Li, Y.; Liang, J.-H.; Gao, T.-S.; Deng, B.; Yao, J.-J.; Lin, L.; Chen, F.-P.; Huang, X.-D.; et al. Pretreatment MRI radiomics analysis allows for reliable prediction of local recurrence in non-metastatic T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma. EBioMedicine 2019, 42, 270–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hogan, C.A.; Rajpurkar, P.; Sowrirajan, H.; Phillips, N.A.; Le, A.T.; Wu, M.; Garamani, N.; Sahoo, M.K.; Wood, M.L.; Huang, C.; et al. Nasopharyngeal metabolomics and machine learning approach for the diagnosis of influenza. EBioMedicine 2021, 71, 103546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kong, L.; Lu, J.J. Reirradiation of locally recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer: History, advances, and promises for the future. Chin. Clin. Oncol. 2016, 5, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Tsang, R.K.; Wei, W.I. Salvage surgery for nasopharyngeal cancer. World J. Otorhinolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2015, 1, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Li, G.; Wang, J.; Tang, H.; Han, R.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhou, H. Comparing endoscopic surgeries with open surgeries in terms of effectiveness and safety in salvaging residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Head Neck 2020, 42, 3415–3426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Na’Ara, S.; Amit, M.; Billan, S.; Cohen, J.T.; Gil, Z. Outcome of Patients Undergoing Salvage Surgery for Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2014, 21, 3056–3062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Yang, J.; Song, X.; Sun, X.; Liu, Q.; Hu, L.; Yu, H.; Wang, D. Outcomes of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients treated with endoscopic nasopharyngectomy: A meta-analysis. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2020, 10, 1001–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Yue, Q.; Zhang, M.; Chen, Y.; Zheng, D.; Chen, Y.; Feng, M. Establishment of prognostic factors in recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients who received salvage intensity-modulated radiotherapy: A meta-analysis. Oral Oncol. 2018, 81, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Leong, Y.H.; Soon, Y.Y.; Lee, K.M.; Wong, L.C.; Tham, I.W.K.; Ho, F.C.H. Long-term outcomes after reirradiation in nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: A meta-analysis. Head Neck 2017, 40, 622–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wang, B.C.; Cao, R.B.; Fu, C.; Chen, W.B.; Li, P.D.; Lin, G.H.; Liu, Q. The efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Oral Oncol. 2020, 104, 104640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Nyst, H.J.; Wildeman, M.A.; Indrasari, S.R.; Karakullukcu, B.; van Veen, R.L.; Adham, M.; Tan, I.B. Temoporfin mediated photodynamic therapy in patients with local persistent and recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma after curative radiotherapy: A feasibility study. Photodiagn. Photodyn. Ther. 2012, 9, 274–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ma, Y.; Chen, X.; Wang, A.; Zhao, H.; Lin, Q.; Bao, H.; Zhang, Y.; Hong, S.; Tang, W.; Huang, Y.; et al. Copy number loss in granzyme genes confers resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitor in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J. Immunother. Cancer 2021, 9, e002014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Jin, T.; Zhang, Q.; Jin, Q.-F.; Hua, Y.-H.; Chen, X.-Z. Anti-PD1 checkpoint inhibitor with or without chemotherapy for patients with recurrent and metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Transl. Oncol. 2020, 14, 100989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Qiu, S.; Lu, J.; Zheng, W.; Xu, L.; Lin, S.; Huang, C.; Xu, Y.; Huang, L.; Pan, J. Advantages of intensity modulated radiotherapy in recurrent T1-2 nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A retrospective study. BMC Cancer 2014, 14, 797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Dionisi, F.; Croci, S.; Giacomelli, I.; Cianchetti, M.; Caldara, A.; Bertolin, M.; Vanoni, V.; Pertile, R.; Widesott, L.; Farace, P.; et al. Clinical results of proton therapy reirradiation for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Acta Oncol. 2019, 58, 1238–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Hu, J.; Huang, Q.; Gao, J.; Guan, X.; Hu, W.; Yang, J.; Qiu, X.; Chen, M.; Kong, L.; Lu, J.J. Clinical outcomes of carbon-ion radiotherapy for patients with locoregionally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer 2020, 126, 5173–5183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Hu, J.; Bao, C.; Gao, J.; Guan, X.; Hu, W.; Yang, J.; Hu, C.; Kong, L.; Lu, J.J. Salvage treatment using carbon ion radiation in patients with locoregionally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Initial results. Cancer 2018, 124, 2427–2437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Wang, L.; Hu, J.; Liu, X.; Wang, W.; Kong, L.; Lu, J.J. Intensity-modulated carbon-ion radiation therapy versus intensity-modulated photon-based radiation therapy in locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A dosimetric comparison. Cancer Manag. Res. 2019, 11, 7767–7777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Han, F.; Zhao, C.; Huang, S.-M.; Lu, L.-X.; Huang, Y.; Deng, X.-W.; Mai, W.-Y.; Teh, B.S.; Butler, E.B.; Lu, T.-X. Long-term Outcomes and Prognostic Factors of Re-irradiation for Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma using Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy. Clin. Oncol. 2012, 24, 569–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Hua, Y.-J.; Han, F.; Lu, L.-X.; Mai, H.-Q.; Guo, X.; Hong, M.-H.; Lu, T.-X.; Zhao, C. Long-term treatment outcome of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with salvage intensity modulated radiotherapy. Eur. J. Cancer 2012, 48, 3422–3428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chen, H.-Y.; Ma, X.-M.; Ye, M.; Hou, Y.-L.; Xie, H.-Y.; Bai, Y.-R. Effectiveness and Toxicities of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Patients with Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e73918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Tian, Y.-M.; Tian, Y.-H.; Zeng, L.; Liu, S.; Guan, Y.; Lu, T.-X.; Han, F. Prognostic model for survival of local recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Br. J. Cancer 2013, 110, 297–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Karam, I.; Huang, S.H.; McNiven, A.; Su, J.; Xu, W.; Waldron, J.; Bayley, A.J.; Kim, J.; Cho, J.; Ringash, J.; et al. Outcomes after reirradiation for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: North American experience. Head Neck 2015, 38, E1102–E1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Xiao, W.; Liu, S.; Tian, Y.; Guan, Y.; Huang, S.; Lin, C.; Zhao, C.; Lu, T.; Han, F. Prognostic Significance of Tumor Volume in Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treated with Salvage Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0125351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Chan, O.S.H.; Sze, H.C.K.; Lee, M.C.H.; Chan, L.L.K.; Chang, A.T.Y.; Lee, S.W.M.; Hung, W.M.; Lee, A.W.M.; Ng, W.T. Reirradiation with intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locally recurrent T3 to T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Head Neck 2016, 39, 533–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Tian, Y.-M.; Huang, W.-Z.; Yuan, X.; Bai, L.; Zhao, C.; Han, F. The challenge in treating locally recurrent T3-4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma: The survival benefit and severe late toxicities of re-irradiation with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 43450–43457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Ng, W.-T.; Ngan, R.K.; Kwong, D.L.; Tung, S.Y.; Yuen, K.-T.; Kam, M.K.; Sze, H.C.; Yiu, H.H.; Chan, L.L.; Lung, M.L.; et al. Prospective, Multicenter, Phase 2 Trial of Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Bio-Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2017, 100, 630–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Kong, F.; Zhou, J.; Du, C.; He, X.; Kong, L.; Hu, C.; Ying, H. Long-term survival and late complications of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. BMC Cancer 2018, 18, 1139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Zhang, H.H.; Zhang, X.W.; Jiang, H. Clinical Efficacy and Prognostic Factors of Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma With Intensity- Modulated Radiotherapy. J. Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ. 2018, 38, 662–669. [Google Scholar]
  77. Yoshizaki, T.; Wakisaka, N.; Murono, S.; Shimizu, Y.; Furukawa, M. Endoscopic Nasopharyngectomy for Patients with Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma at the Primary Site. Laryngoscope 2005, 115, 1517–1519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Chen, M.-K.; Lai, J.-C.; Chang, C.-C.; Liu, M.-T. Minimally Invasive Endoscopic Nasopharyngectomy in the Treatment of Recurrent T1-2a Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Laryngoscope 2007, 117, 894–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Chen, M.-Y.; Wen, W.-P.; Guo, X.; Yang, A.-K.; Qian, C.-N.; Hua, Y.-J.; Wan, X.-B.; Guo, Z.-M.; Li, T.-Y.; Hong, M.-H. Endoscopic nasopharyngectomy for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Laryngoscope 2009, 119, 516–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Chan, J.Y.W.; Wei, W.I. Critical appraisal of maxillary swing approach for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 2012, 16 (Suppl. 1), S111–S117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Mai, H.-Q.; Mo, H.-Y.; Deng, J.-F.; Deng, M.-Q.; Mai, W.-Y.; Huang, X.-M.; Guo, X.; Hong, M.-H. Endoscopic microwave coagulation therapy for early recurrent T1 nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Eur. J. Cancer 2009, 45, 1107–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Lin, H.; Weng, X.; Wu, X.; Wu, L. The efficacy and safety of apatinib in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Transl. Cancer Res. 2022, 11, 1770–1780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Ho, A.S.; Kaplan, M.J.; Fee, W.E., Jr.; Yao, M.; Sunwoo, J.B.; Hwang, P.H. Targeted endoscopic salvage nasopharyngectomy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2011, 2, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Castelnuovo, P.; Nicolai, P.; Turri-Zanoni, M.; Battaglia, P.; Villaret, A.B.; Gallo, S.; Bignami, M.; Dallan, I. Endoscopic Endonasal Nasopharyngectomy in Selected Cancers. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2013, 149, 424–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Emanuelli, E.; Albu, S.; Cazzador, D.; Pedruzzi, B.; Babighian, G.; Martini, A. Endoscopic Surgery for Recurrent Undifferentiated Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. J. Craniofacial Surg. 2014, 25, 1003–1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Chen, Z.; Qiu, Q. Analysis of Clinical Eifcacy and the Quality of Life After Endoscopic Nasopharyngectomy for Residual or Recurrent Nasopharyngela Carcinoma. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi 2015, 50, 96–903. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  87. Vlantis, A.; Lee, D.L.; Wong, E.W.; Chow, S.M.; Ng, S.K.; Chan, J.Y. Endoscopic nasopharyngectomy in recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A case series, literature review, and pooled analysis. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016, 7, 425–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Liu, J.; Yu, H.; Sun, X.; Wang, D.; Gu, Y.; Liu, Q.; Wang, H.; Han, W.; Fry, A. Salvage endoscopic nasopharyngectomy for local recurrent or residual nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A 10-year experience. Int. J. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 22, 834–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Sun, X.; Liu, J.; Wang, H.; Yu, H.; Wang, J.; Li, H.; Gu, Y.; Guo, L.; Wang, D. [Endoscopic nasopharyngectomy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A review of 71 patients and analysis of the prognostic factors]. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi 2015, 50, 890–895. [Google Scholar]
  90. Thamboo, A.; Patel, V.S.; Hwang, P.H. 5-year outcomes of salvage endoscopic nasopharyngectomy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2021, 50, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Yang, R.; Wu, H.; Chen, B.; Sun, W.; Hu, X.; Wang, T.; Guo, Y.; Qiu, Y.; Dai, J. Balloon Test Occlusion of Internal Carotid Artery in Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Before Endoscopic Nasopharyngectomy: A Single Center Experience. Front. Oncol. 2021, 11, 674889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Hetzel, A.; Von Reutern, G.-M.; Wernz, M.; Droste, D.; Schumacher, M. The Carotid Compression Test for Therapeutic Occlusion of the Internal Carotid Artery. Comparison of angiography with transcranial Doppler sonography. Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2000, 10, 194–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Tani, S.; Imamura, H.; Asai, K.; Shimizu, K.; Adachi, H.; Tokunaga, S.; Sakai, N. Comparison of practical methods in clinical sites for estimating cerebral blood flow during balloon test occlusion. J. Neurosurg. 2018, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Tayebi Meybodi, A.; Huang, W.; Benet, A.; Kola, O.; Lawton, M.T. Bypass surgery for complex middle cerebral artery aneurysms: An algorithmic approach to revascularization. J. Neurosurg. 2017, 127, 463–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Nurminen, V.; Kivipelto, L.; Kivisaari, R.; Niemelä, M.; Lehecka, M. Bypass Surgery for Complex Internal Carotid Artery Aneurysms: 39 Consecutive Patients. World Neurosurg. 2019, 126, e453–e462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. A Laurie, S.; Ho, A.L.; Fury, M.G.; Sherman, E.; Pfister, D.G. Systemic therapy in the management of metastatic or locally recurrent adenoid cystic carcinoma of the salivary glands: A systematic review. Lancet Oncol. 2011, 12, 815–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Birtle, A.; Johnson, M.; Chester, J.; Jones, R.; Dolling, D.; Bryan, R.T.; Harris, C.; Winterbottom, A.; Blacker, A.; Catto, J.; et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (the POUT trial): A phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2020, 395, 1268–1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Vlachostergios, P.; Faltas, B.M. Treatment resistance in urothelial carcinoma: An evolutionary perspective. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2018, 15, 495–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Saygin, C.; Carraway, H.E. Emerging therapies for acute myeloid leukemia. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2017, 10, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Zhang, B.; Li, M.M.; Chen, W.H.; Zhao, J.F.; Chen, W.Q.; Dong, Y.H.; Zhang, S.X. Association of Chemoradiotherapy Regimens and Survival among Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw. Open. 2019, 2, e1913619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Peng, Z.; Wang, Y.; Fang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Yuan, X.; Shuai, M.; Xie, S.; Fan, R.; Zhang, H.; Xie, Z.; et al. Salvage Endoscopic Skull Base Surgery: Another Treatment Option after Immunotherapy for Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 899932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Ruan, X.; Liang, J.; Pan, Y.; Cai, R.; Zhang, R.J.; He, Z.; Yang, X.; Niu, Z.; Jiang, W. Apatinib for the treatment of metastatic or locoregionally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma after failure of chemotherapy: A multicenter, single-arm, prospective phase 2 study. Cancer 2021, 127, 3163–3171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Xue, Z.; Lui, V.W.Y.; Li, Y.; Jia, L.; You, C.; Li, X.; Piao, W.; Yuan, H.; Khong, P.L.; Lo, K.W.; et al. Therapeutic evaluation of palbociclib and its compatibility with other chemotherapies for primary and recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2020, 39, 262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Ng, W.; Lee, M.C.; Fung, N.T.; Wong, E.C.; Cheung, A.K.; Chow, J.C.; Au, K.; Mc Poon, D.; Lai, J.W.; Chiang, C.; et al. Dose volume effects of re-irradiation for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Head Neck 2019, 42, 180–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Huang, C.-L.; Guo, R.; Li, J.-Y.; Xu, C.; Mao, Y.-P.; Tian, L.; Lin, A.-H.; Sun, Y.; Ma, J.; Tang, L.-L. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: Clinical outcomes and patterns of failure among subsets of 8th AJCC stage IVa. Eur. Radiol. 2019, 30, 816–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Wang, Y.; Wang, Z.-Q.; Jiang, Y.-X.; Wang, F.-H.; Luo, H.-Y.; Liang, Y.; Wang, D.-S.; Li, Y.-H. A triplet chemotherapy regimen of cisplatin, fluorouracil and paclitaxel for locoregionally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma cases contraindicated for re-irradiation/surgery. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 2016, 17, 1585–1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Chen, Y.H.; Luo, S.D.; Wu, S.C.; Wu, C.N.; Chiu, T.J.; Wang, Y.M.; Yang, Y.H.; Chen, W.C. Clinical Characteristics and Predictive Outcomes of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma-A Lingering Pitfall of the Long Latency. Cancers 2022, 14, 3795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Chen, C.; Wang, F.-H.; An, X.; Luo, H.-Y.; Wang, Z.-Q.; Liang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Li, Y.-H. Triplet combination with paclitaxel, cisplatin and 5-FU is effective in metastatic and/or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2012, 71, 371–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Xue, C.; Huang, Y.; Huang, P.Y.; Yu, Q.T.; Pan, J.J.; Liu, L.Z.; Song, X.Q.; Lin, S.J.; Wu, J.X.; Zhang, J.W.; et al. Phase II study of sorafenib in combination with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil to treat recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Ann. Oncol. 2012, 24, 1055–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Peng, P.-J.; Cheng, H.; Ou, X.-Q.; Zeng, L.-J.; Wu, X.; Liu, Y.-M.; Lin, Z.; Tang, Y.-N.; Wang, S.-Y.; Zhang, H.-Y.; et al. Safety and efficacy of S-1 chemotherapy in recurrent and metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy: Multi-institutional retrospective analysis. Drug Des. Dev. Ther. 2014, 8, 1083-7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Peng, P.-J.; Lv, B.-J.; Wang, Z.-H.; Liao, H.; Liu, Y.-M.; Lin, Z.; Con, Y.-Y.; Huang, P.-Y. Multi-institutional prospective study of nedaplatin plus S-1 chemotherapy in recurrent and metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients after failure of platinum-containing regimens. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 2016, 9, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Chen, X.; Liang, W.; Wan, N.; Zhang, L.; Yang, Y.; Jiang, J.; Zhang, T. Cost-effectiveness analysis of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin for first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Oral Oncol. 2019, 94, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Hong, S.; Zhang, Y.; Yu, G.; Peng, P.; Peng, J.; Jia, J.; Wu, X.; Huang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Lin, Q.; et al. Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Versus Fluorouracil Plus Cisplatin as First-Line Therapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Final Overall Survival Analysis of GEM20110714 Phase III Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2021, 39, 3273–3282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Zhang, L.; Huang, Y.; Hong, S.; Yang, Y.; Yu, G.; Jia, J.; Peng, P.; Wu, X.; Lin, Q.; Xi, X.; et al. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin in recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2016, 388, 1883–1892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Zong, J.-F.; Liang, Q.-D.; Lu, Q.-J.; Liu, Y.-H.; Xu, H.-C.; Chen, B.-J.; Guo, Q.-J.; Xu, Y.; Hu, C.-R.; Pan, J.-J.; et al. Comparison of radiotherapy combined with nimotuzumab vs. chemoradiotherapy for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. BMC Cancer 2021, 21, 1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Ma, B.B.Y.; Lim, W.T.; Goh, B.C.; Hui, E.P.; Lo, K.W.; Pettinger, A.; Chan, A.T. Antitumor Activity of Nivolumab in Recurrent and Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: An International, Multicenter Study of the Mayo Clinic Phase 2 Consortium (NCI-9742). J. Clin. Oncol. 2018, 36, 1412–1418, Correction in J. Clin. Oncol. 2018, 36, 2360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Lv, J.-W.; Li, J.-Y.; Luo, L.-N.; Wang, Z.-X.; Chen, Y.-P. Comparative safety and efficacy of anti-PD-1 monotherapy, chemotherapy alone, and their combination therapy in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Findings from recent advances in landmark trials. J. Immunother. Cancer 2019, 7, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Zhu, Y.; Yang, S.; Zhou, S.; Yang, J.; Qin, Y.; Gui, L.; Shi, Y.; He, X. Nimotuzumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy versus platinum-based chemotherapy alone in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 2020, 12, 1758835920953738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Chong, W.Q.; Lim, C.M.; Sinha, A.K.; Tan, C.S.; Chan, G.H.J.; Huang, Y.; Kumarakulasinghe, N.B.; Sundar, R.; Jeyasekharan, A.D.; Loh, W.S.; et al. Integration of Antiangiogenic Therapy with Cisplatin and Gemcitabine Chemotherapy in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 2020, 26, 5320–5328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Yang, Y.; Qu, S.; Li, J.; Hu, C.; Xu, M.; Li, W.; Zhou, T.; Shen, L.; Wu, H.; Lang, J.; et al. Camrelizumab versus placebo in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin as first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (CAPTAIN-1st): A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021, 22, 1162–1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Guo, S.-S.; Liu, R.; Wen, Y.-F.; Liu, L.-T.; Yuan, L.; Li, Y.-X.; Li, Y.; Hao, W.-W.; Peng, J.-Y.; Chen, D.-N.; et al. Endogenous production of C-C motif chemokine ligand 2 by nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells drives radioresistance-associated metastasis. Cancer Lett. 2020, 468, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Wang, Z.; Zuo, W.; Zeng, Q.; Li, Y.; Lu, T.; Bu, Y.; Hu, G. The Homologous Recombination Repair Pathway is Associated with Resistance to Radiotherapy in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2020, 16, 408–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Xie, P.; Yang, J.-P.; Cao, Y.; Peng, L.-X.; Zheng, L.-S.; Sun, R.; Meng, D.-F.; Wang, M.-Y.; Mei, Y.; Qiang, Y.-Y.; et al. Promoting tumorigenesis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma, NEDD8 serves as a potential theranostic target. Cell Death Dis. 2017, 8, e2834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Liu, S.-C.; Hsu, T.; Chang, Y.-S.; Chung, A.-K.; Jiang, S.S.; Ouyang, C.-N.; Yuh, C.-H.; Hsueh, C.; Liu, Y.-P.; Tsang, N.-M. Cytoplasmic LIF reprograms invasive mode to enhance NPC dissemination through modulating YAP1-FAK/PXN signaling. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 5105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  125. Ke, Y.; Wu, C.; Zeng, Y.; Chen, M.; Li, Y.; Xie, C.; Zhou, Y.; Zhong, Y.; Yu, H. Radiosensitization of Clioquinol Combined with Zinc in the Nasopharyngeal Cancer Stem-like Cells by Inhibiting Autophagy In Vitro and In Vivo. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2020, 16, 777–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Valouev, A.; Weng, Z.; Sweeney, R.T.; Varma, S.; Le, Q.-T.; Kong, C.; Sidow, A.; West, R.B. Discovery of recurrent structural variants in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Genome Res. 2013, 24, 300–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Qu, C.; Zhao, Y.; Feng, G.; Chen, C.; Tao, Y.; Zhou, S.; Liu, S.; Chang, H.; Zeng, M.; Xia, Y. RPA3 is a potential marker of prognosis and radioresistance for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2017, 21, 2872–2883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cancers 14 04111 g001 550
Figure 1. The common sites of tumor involvement in recurrent NPC. NPC, nasopharyngeal carcinoma; ICA, internal carotid artery.
Figure 1. The common sites of tumor involvement in recurrent NPC. NPC, nasopharyngeal carcinoma; ICA, internal carotid artery.
Cancers 14 04111 g001
Cancers 14 04111 g002 550
Figure 2. (A) HRCT and MRI images of bone necrosis in recurrent NPC patients. (B) HRCT and MRI images of soft tissue necrosis in recurrent NPC patients. An “air bubble shadow” can be seen in the soft tissue shadow on CT.
Figure 2. (A) HRCT and MRI images of bone necrosis in recurrent NPC patients. (B) HRCT and MRI images of soft tissue necrosis in recurrent NPC patients. An “air bubble shadow” can be seen in the soft tissue shadow on CT.
Cancers 14 04111 g002
Cancers 14 04111 g003 550
Figure 3. Flowchart for the diagnosis and treatment of recurrent NPC with post-treatment management. ENT, ear nose and throat; MO, medical oncology; ICA, internal carotid artery; BOT, balloon occlusion test; P, positive; N, negative; EEN, endoscopic endonasal nasopharyngectomy; ICT, induction chemotherapy; IMRT, intensity-modulated radiation therapy.
Figure 3. Flowchart for the diagnosis and treatment of recurrent NPC with post-treatment management. ENT, ear nose and throat; MO, medical oncology; ICA, internal carotid artery; BOT, balloon occlusion test; P, positive; N, negative; EEN, endoscopic endonasal nasopharyngectomy; ICT, induction chemotherapy; IMRT, intensity-modulated radiation therapy.
Cancers 14 04111 g003
Cancers 14 04111 g004 550
Figure 4. Related molecules and pathways affecting NPC recurrence and progression, such as invasive metastasis and radio resistance.
Figure 4. Related molecules and pathways affecting NPC recurrence and progression, such as invasive metastasis and radio resistance.
Cancers 14 04111 g004
Table
Table 1. Characteristics of the literature on IMRT for recurrent NPC in the last 10 years.
Table 1. Characteristics of the literature on IMRT for recurrent NPC in the last 10 years.
YearNo. of
Patients		M/FrT ClassificationReRT Mean Dose (Gy)CCTOS Rate (%)DFS (%)LCR/LRFS
(%)		Median Follow-Up Time (Months)
rT1-2rT3-4 2-Year3-Year5-Year2-Year5-Year3-Year5-Year
Qiu et al. [29]20127056/14304070.0 (50.0–77.4)1867.4--65.8---25.0 (3.0–80.0)
Han et al. [66]2012239182/575918070.0 (61.7–77.5)117--44.9-45.4-85.812.0 (3.0–62.0)
Hua et al. [67]2012151122/292912270.4 (62.1–77.6)37-46.438.0--83.280.740.0 (7.2–116.9)
Chen et al. [68]20135444/10114370.0 (49.8–76.6)1844.3------16.5 (1.0–93.0)
Tian et al. [69]2013251195/565319870.7 (61.1–79.7)126-53.241.1--80.675.140.0 (3.0–147.0)
Karam et al. [70]20152720/721654.0 (39.0–97.0)23-53.0---53.0-36.0
You et al. [16]20157218/545913-42--55.550.0--82.349.4 (3.1–149.0)
Zou et al. [20]2015218173/4557161-84--39.0----33.0 (2.0–146.0)
Xiao et al. [71]2015291225/6647244-120--33.2---66.629.0 (3.1–146.0)
Chan et al. [72]20163831/7038-8-47.2---44.3-47.8 (13.5–118.1)
Tian et al. [73]2017245196/49024570.0 (60.1–78.7)157--27.5---60.924.0 (2.0–132.0)
Ng et al. [74]201733-033---63.8---49.2-28.5
Kong et al. [75]2018184133/516412066.7 (42.0–77)138-46.028.8--85.171.132.0 (3.0–125.0)
Zhang et al. [76]20194433/11212366.0 (54.0–70.0)33-56.8---58.9-28.0 (5.0–168.0)
Liu et al. [6]202110072/286931--77.768.057.281.859.089.877.0-
IMRT, intensity-modulated radiotherapy; NPC, nasopharyngeal carcinoma; M, male; F, female; ReRT, re-radiotherapy; CCT, concurrent chemotherapy; OS, overall survival; DFS, disease-free survival; LCR, local control rate; LRFS, local recurrence-free survival.
Table
Table 2. Characteristics of the literature on EEN for recurrent NPC in the last 10 years.
Table 2. Characteristics of the literature on EEN for recurrent NPC in the last 10 years.
AuthorsYearNO. of
Patients		M/FrT ClassificationsMargin(+/−)Margins+ TherapyOS Rate (%)DFS Rate (%)Mean Follow-Up Time (Months)
rT1-2rT3-42-Year5-Year2-Year5-Year
Ho et al. [83]2012139/41124/9Y100- -24.2
Castelnuovo et al. [84]201327-13143/24-81.575.170.458.131.2
Emanuelli et al. [85]201486/280--100-88.9-27.0
You et al. [16]20157254/185913---77.1---
Zou et al. [20]20159222/707913---78.1---
Chen et al. [86]20159672/24385851/44-51.7----
Wong et al. [27]201615-0156/9Y66.7-40.0-28.7
Vlantis et al. [87]20161811/71802/16N10088.990.0-22.0
Weng et al. [19]20173626/101719--66.5-64.0-54.0
Liu et al. [88]20179171/204348--64.838.357.530.2median 23.0
Sun et al. [89]20157153/18373417/20-56.3----
Tang et al. [82]20195544/1145104/51-98.2---18.0
Wong et al. [25]201912-012---50-2544.8
Li et al. [9]2020189132/57979232/157-82.243.6--median 24.0
Thamboo et al. [90]2021139/41123/10Y10084.676.953.874.3
Liu et al. [6]202196-66306/90-89.973.881.859.0median 56.0
Peng et al. [7]20215638/181343--48.6-42.6-44.0
EEN, endoscopic endonasal nasopharyngectomy; NPC, nasopharyngeal carcinoma; M, male; F, female; Y, yes; N, no; OS, overall survival; DFS, disease-free survival.
Table
Table 3. Complications of the two main treatment modalities for recurrent NPC.
Table 3. Complications of the two main treatment modalities for recurrent NPC.
ComplicationsNo. of Patients in IMRT (Median, Range, %)No. of Patients in EEN (Median, Range, %)
Cranial nerve palsies11.4 (7.1–28.6)13.9
Headache17.3 (8.7–23.1)24.0 (9.7–25.0)
Trismus22.2 (7.9–46.2)9.7
Deafness29.3 (4.5–65.4)11.1 (6.9–34.0)
Otitis media23.130.8 (25.0–70.0)
Necrosis (including ON, TLN, NN)46.2 (3.6–63.7)23.1 (6.9–44.4)
Dysphagia17.3 (5.5–26.3)8.3 (7.7–9.3)
Hemorrhage15.8 (11.5–17.2)6.0 (2.8–9.9)
Sinusitis40.612.0 (5.0–15.4)
Xerostomia30.811.1–17.9
Neck fibrosis26.3 (0.5–34.6)-
Cachexia15.34.2–10.7
NPC, nasopharyngeal carcinoma; ON, osteoradionecrosis; TLN, temporal lobe necrosis; NN, necrosis of nasopharynx.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Peng, Z.; Wang, Y.; Fan, R.; Gao, K.; Xie, S.; Wang, F.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, H.; He, Y.; Xie, Z.; et al. Treatment of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Sequential Challenge. Cancers 2022, 14, 4111. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174111

AMA Style

Peng Z, Wang Y, Fan R, Gao K, Xie S, Wang F, Zhang J, Zhang H, He Y, Xie Z, et al. Treatment of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Sequential Challenge. Cancers. 2022; 14(17):4111. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174111

Chicago/Turabian Style

Peng, Zhouying, Yumin Wang, Ruohao Fan, Kelei Gao, Shumin Xie, Fengjun Wang, Junyi Zhang, Hua Zhang, Yuxiang He, Zhihai Xie, and et al. 2022. "Treatment of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Sequential Challenge" Cancers 14, no. 17: 4111. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174111

APA Style

Peng, Z., Wang, Y., Fan, R., Gao, K., Xie, S., Wang, F., Zhang, J., Zhang, H., He, Y., Xie, Z., & Jiang, W. (2022). Treatment of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Sequential Challenge. Cancers, 14(17), 4111. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174111

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop