For the ease of interpreting the data, a letter code was assigned to the different treatment protocol groups (see Table 1). For T1,2N+ tumors, no LRs (0%; 0/34) were found for Group B (Rotterdam series), in contrast

to Group C (Amsterdam series) (10%; 4/40) (p = 0.058). In the T3,4N0,+ category, brachytherapy (BT) does not impact the LR rate (LRR), that is, an LRR of 11% (4/38) for Group B vs. 11% (4/36) for Group C (p = 0.935). With respect to the Vienna protocol series, an LRR for T1,2N+ tumors of 12% (8/67) for Groups C + B (i.e., plus EBT boost) vs. 16% (10/62) for Groups C − B (i.e., no EBT boost) was observed (p = 0.492). Same was true for the advanced T-stage MK0683 in vitro categories (T3,4N+,0): NVP-BEZ235 clinical trial An LR of 26% (17/65) vs. 19% (13/69) for the Groups (C + B) vs. (C − B), respectively, was seen. Finally, because there was an overlap and similarity for the Groups C and (C − B), we compared the LRR of the group of patients denoted as Ctotal (=C + [C − B]) for T1,2N+ and T3,4N0,+ cases. For Group Ctotal T1,2N+ cancers, an LR of 14% (14/102) vs. 0% (0/34) was observed for the Group B (p = 0.023). For Group Ctotal T3,4N0,+ tumors, an LR of 15% (17/111) vs. 11% (4/38)

for the Group B was seen (p = 0.463). The regional relapse rate for small tumors was 0%, for advanced tumors depending HER2 inhibitor on the tumor stage variable from 7% (T1,2N+, T3,4N0,+, and Rotterdam series) to 15% (T1,2N+, T3,4N0,+, and Vienna series without boost) and 16% (T1,2N+, T3,4N0,+, and Vienna + Boost). Seventeen of 72 N0,1,2,3 (24%) patients, treated by the Rotterdam protocol, developed M+ at some point in time; for the Groups C, (C + B), and (C − B), the M+ rates were 24%, 26%, and 20%, respectively. A higher number of patients with M+ was observed with higher N-stage at presentations, that is, N0, N1, N2, and N3 disease corresponded with 0/17 (0%), 3/16 (19%), 10/33 (30%), and 5/14 (36), respectively, of patients having M+

disease. Over the years, across countries, the principles of how to treat NPC have become more or less standardized, albeit that in practice, for example, different fractionation schedules and RT techniques are in use. The Rotterdam and Amsterdam protocols focus on conventional fractionation schedules with total doses up to 70/2 Gy. It has long been established that NPC is a “chemoradioresponsive” tumor, and at the present time, many of the reported series are therefore basically the outcome of RT and (concomitant) CHT. This article evaluated the 8-year results of a series of patients treated in the Erasmus MC-Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center (Rotterdam) and those treated in Amsterdam series.