Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Elderly patients are underrepresented in clinical trials supporting concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) as the standard treatment for patients with stage T1-2N1M0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). This study aimed to develop and validate a prognostic nomogram in elderly patients (≥ 60 years) with stage T1-2N1M0 NPC to distinguish low-risk subgroup for whom intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) alone is sufficient. Methods This multi-center study retrospectively analyzed 615 elderly patients with stage T1-2N1M0 NPC and Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 (ACE-27) scores < 2, including 297 and 318 patients in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. A nomogram for cancer-specific survival (CSS) was developed using multivariable Cox regression and validated using concordance indices (C-index), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Survival outcomes were compared using log-rank tests. Results Four independent predictors for CSS were identified to construct the nomograms: age, Epstein-Barr virus DNA (EBV-DNA), and extracapsular spread (ECS) of retropharyngeal and cervical lymph nodes. Nomogram A incorporated all four predictors. Nomograms B, C, and D were constructed based on T stage, EBV-DNA, and their combination, respectively. In the training cohort, the C-index of Nomogram A was 0.768, which was statistically higher than those of Nomogram B (0.530), Nomogram C (0.635), and Nomogram D (0.641). Calibration curves and DCA demonstrated good calibration and clinical utility for Nomogram A. Risk stratification using Nomogram A showed that in the low-risk group, IMRT alone achieved comparable 5-year CSS to chemoradiotherapy (CRT). These findings were confirmed in the validation cohort. Conclusions A nomogram integrating lymph node ECS, age, and EBV-DNA was developed to effectively identify optimal candidates among elderly patients with stage T1-2N1M0 NPC and ACE-27 scores < 2 for treatment with IMRT alone. Clinical trial number Not applicable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: