Interventions for the treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer: radiotherapy

Association of Tongue Strength and Maximum Incisal Opening with Oral Intake in Persons with Head and Neck Cancer Treated with Radiotherapy: A Retrospective Study

Persons treated with radiotherapy (RT) for cancer of the head and neck (HNC) may experience limited oral intake at treatment completion. The purpose of this retrospective study was to examine the contributions of tongue strength and maximum incisal opening (MIO) to oral intake in a cohort of veterans treated for HNC. Medical records of veterans diagnosed with HNC treated with RT who were seen by the Speech Pathology Service prior to and throughout treatment per usual care were reviewed for this study; eighty-two records met the inclusion criteria for analysis. Tongue strength in kPa, MIO in mm, feeding tube status at completion of RT, and food and liquid consistencies consumed at completion of RT were among the data abstracted from the records. Most veterans (67%) did not have a feeding tube present at the completion of RT and reported drinking thin liquids (84.2%) at treatment completion. Eighteen percent reported including all food consistencies in their diet at the end of treatment. Both MIO and tongue strength decreased after treatment. Greater tongue strength during RT and larger MIO at the completion of RT were predictive of improved functional outcomes for oral intake at the end of treatment. This study provides evidence of the importance of increasing tongue strength and MIO during treatment with RT, and supports an important focus for intervention by speech-language pathologists.

Angelicin inhibits cell growth and promotes apoptosis in oral squamous cell carcinoma by negatively regulating DUSP6/cMYC signaling pathway

Angelicin has been reported to have antitumor effects on many types of cancer. However, few studies on angelicin in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) have been performed. We performed cell cycle and apoptosis analyses to assess the effect of angelicin on OSCC cells. We conducted RNA-seq studies to reveal differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Dual-specificity phosphatase 6 (DUSP6) and c-MYC were strongly down-regulated differential genes. Silencing RNA (siRNA) was used to knockdown DUSP6. The mouse xenograft model was used to mimic OSCC. Angelicin inhibited OSCC in vitro. We found that DUSP6 interacted with c-MYC. DUSP6 knockdown group and DUSP6 knockdown + angelicin group had similar effects of OSCC cells. Angelicin could reduce tumor formation, DUSP6, and c-MYC expression in vivo. Compared with paclitaxel, the tumor inhibition effect of the two drugs was similar. However, angelicin did not cause weight loss and had lower toxicity. In sum, Angelicin has antitumor effects on OSCC in vitro and vivo by negatively regulating the DUSP6 mediated c-MYC signaling pathway.

Interventions for the treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers: surgical treatment

BACKGROUND

Surgery is a common treatment option in oral cavity cancer (and less frequently in oropharyngeal cancer) to remove the primary tumour and sometimes neck lymph nodes. People with early-stage disease may undergo surgery alone or surgery plus radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy/biotherapy, or a combination of these. Timing and extent of surgery varies. This is the third update of a review originally published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the relative benefits and harms of different surgical treatment modalities for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 9 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared two or more surgical treatment modalities, or surgery versus other treatment modalities, for primary tumours of the oral cavity or oropharynx.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Our primary outcomes were overall survival, disease-free survival, locoregional recurrence, and recurrence; and our secondary outcomes were adverse effects of treatment, quality of life, direct and indirect costs to patients and health services, and participant satisfaction. We used standard Cochrane methods. We reported survival data as hazard ratios (HRs). For overall survival, we reported the HR of mortality, and for disease-free survival, we reported the combined HR of new disease, progression, and mortality; therefore, HRs below 1 indicated improvement in these outcomes. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four new trials, bringing the total number of included trials to 15 (2820 participants randomised, 2583 participants analysed). For objective outcomes, we assessed four trials at high risk of bias, three at low risk, and eight at unclear risk. The trials evaluated nine comparisons; none compared different surgical approaches for excision of the primary tumour. Five trials evaluated elective neck dissection (ND) versus therapeutic (delayed) ND in people with oral cavity cancer and clinically negative neck nodes. Elective ND compared with therapeutic ND probably improves overall survival (HR 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 0.83; I2 = 0%; 4 trials, 883 participants; moderate certainty) and disease-free survival (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.70; I2 = 12%; 5 trials, 954 participants; moderate certainty), and probably reduces locoregional recurrence (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.78; I2 = 0%; 4 trials, 458 participants; moderate certainty) and recurrence (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.70; I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 633 participants; moderate certainty). Elective ND is probably associated with more adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.31, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.54; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 746 participants; moderate certainty). Two trials evaluated elective radical ND versus elective selective ND in people with oral cavity cancer, but we were unable to pool the data as the trials used different surgical procedures. Neither study found evidence of a difference in overall survival (pooled measure not estimable; very low certainty). We are unsure if there is a difference in effect on disease-free survival (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.11; 1 trial, 104 participants; very low certainty) or recurrence (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.33; 1 trial, 143 participants; very low certainty). There may be no difference between the interventions in terms of adverse events (1 trial, 148 participants; low certainty). Two trials evaluated superselective ND versus selective ND, but we were unable to use the data. One trial evaluated supraomohyoid ND versus modified radical ND in 332 participants. We were unable to use any of the primary outcome data. The evidence on adverse events was very uncertain, with more complications, pain, and poorer shoulder function in the modified radical ND group. One trial evaluated sentinel node biopsy versus elective ND in 279 participants. There may be little or no difference between the interventions in overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.11; low certainty), disease-free survival (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; low certainty), or locoregional recurrence (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.19; low certainty). The trial provided no usable data for recurrence, and reported no adverse events (very low certainty). One trial evaluated positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) following chemoradiotherapy (with ND only if no or incomplete response) versus planned ND (before or after chemoradiotherapy) in 564 participants. There is probably no difference between the interventions in overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.31; moderate certainty) or locoregional recurrence (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06; moderate certainty). One trial evaluated surgery plus radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone and provided very low-certainty evidence of better overall survival in the surgery plus radiotherapy group (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.59; 35 participants). The data were unreliable because the trial stopped early and had multiple protocol violations. In terms of adverse events, subcutaneous fibrosis was more frequent in the surgery plus radiotherapy group, but there were no differences in other adverse events (very low certainty). One trial evaluated surgery versus radiotherapy alone for oropharyngeal cancer in 68 participants. There may be little or no difference between the interventions for overall survival (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.09 to 7.46; low certainty) or disease-free survival (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.22; low certainty). For adverse events, there were too many outcomes to draw reliable conclusions. One trial evaluated surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy versus chemotherapy. We were unable to use the data for any of the outcomes reported (very low certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate-certainty evidence based on five trials that elective neck dissection of clinically negative neck nodes at the time of removal of the primary oral cavity tumour is superior to therapeutic neck dissection, with increased survival and disease-free survival, and reduced locoregional recurrence. There was moderate-certainty evidence from one trial of no difference between positron emission tomography (PET-CT) following chemoradiotherapy versus planned neck dissection in terms of overall survival or locoregional recurrence. The evidence for each of the other seven comparisons came from only one or two studies and was assessed as low or very low-certainty.

Fast and Furious: Fast Neutron Therapy in Cancer Treatment

Fast neutron therapy has been used for decades. In conjunction with recent advances in photonic techniques, fast neutrons are no longer of much oncologic interest, which is not unequivocally positive, given their undoubted therapeutic value. This mini-review recalls the history of medical research on fast neutrons, considers their physical and radiobiological properties alongside their benefits for cancer treatment, and discusses their place in modern radiation oncology.

Advanced Polymeric Nanoagents for Oral Cancer Theranostics: A Mini Review

Oral cancer is one of the most common tumours in the world threatening human life and health. The 5-years survival rate of patients with oral cancer has not been improved significantly for many years. The existing clinical diagnostic methods rarely achieve early diagnosis due to deficiencies such as lack of sensitivity. Most of the patients have progressed to the advanced stages when oral cancer is detected. Unfortunately, the traditional treatment methods are usually ineffective at this stage. Therefore, there is an urgent need for more effective and precise techniques for early diagnosis and effective treatment of oral cancer. In recent decades, nanomedicine has been a novel diagnostic and therapeutic platform for various diseases, especially cancer. The synthesis and application of various nanoagents have emerged at the right moment. Among them, polymer nanoagents have unique advantages, such as good stability, high biosafety and high drug loading, showing great potential in the early accurate diagnosis and treatment of tumours. In this review, we focus on the application of advanced polymeric nanoagents in both the diagnosis and treatment of oral cancer. Then, the future therapy strategies and trends for polymeric nanoagents applied to oral cancer are discussed, with the hope that more advanced nanomedical technology will be applied to oral cancer research and promote the development of stomatology.

Clinical assessment for the detection of oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in apparently healthy adults

BACKGROUND

The early detection of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD), followed by appropriate treatment, may improve survival and reduce the risk for malignant transformation respectively. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the diagnostic test accuracy of conventional oral examination, vital rinsing, light-based detection, mouth self-examination, remote screening, and biomarkers, used singly or in combination, for the early detection of OPMD or OSCC in apparently healthy adults.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 20 October 2020), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 20 October 2020), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 20 October 2020). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. We conducted citation searches, and screened reference lists of included studies for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected studies that reported the test accuracy of any of the aforementioned tests in detecting OPMD or OSCC during a screening procedure. Diagnosis of OPMD or OSCC was provided by specialist clinicians or pathologists, or alternatively through follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance. Eligibility, data extraction, and quality assessment were carried out by at least two authors independently and in duplicate. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2). We reported the sensitivity and specificity of the included studies. We provided judgement of the certainty of the evidence using a GRADE assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 studies, recruiting 72,202 participants, published between 1986 and 2019. These studies evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy of conventional oral examination (10 studies, none new to this update), mouth self-examination (four studies, two new to this update), and remote screening (three studies, all new to this update). One randomised controlled trial of test accuracy directly evaluated conventional oral examination plus vital rinsing versus conventional oral examination alone. There were no eligible studies evaluating light-based detection or blood or salivary sample analysis (which tests for the presence of biomarkers for OPMD and OSCC). Only one study of conventional oral examination was judged as at overall low risk of bias and overall low concern regarding applicability. Given the clinical heterogeneity of the included studies in terms of the participants recruited, setting, prevalence of the target condition, the application of the index test and reference standard, and the flow and timing of the process, the data could not be pooled within the broader categories of index test. For conventional oral examination (10 studies, 25,568 participants), prevalence in the test accuracy sample ranged from 1% to 51%. For the seven studies with prevalence of 10% or lower, a prevalence more comparable to the general population, the sensitivity estimates were variable, and ranged from 0.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.93) to 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.00); the specificity estimates were more consistent and ranged from 0.94 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.97) to 0.99 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.00). We judged the overall certainty of the evidence to be low, and downgraded for inconsistency and indirectness. Evidence for mouth self-examination and remote screening was more limited. We judged the overall certainty of the evidence for these index tests to be very low, and downgraded for imprecision, inconsistency, and indirectness. We judged the evidence for vital rinsing (toluidine blue) as an adjunct to conventional oral examination compared to conventional oral examination to be moderate, and downgraded for indirectness as the trial was undertaken in a high-risk population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of high-certainty evidence to support the use of screening programmes for oral cavity cancer and OPMD in the general population. Frontline screeners such as general dentists, dental hygienists, other allied professionals, and community healthcare workers should remain vigilant for signs of OPMD and OSCC.

Diagnostic tests for oral cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients presenting with clinically evident lesions

BACKGROUND

Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common form of malignancy of the oral cavity, and is often proceeded by oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD). Early detection of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (oral cancer) can improve survival rates. The current diagnostic standard of surgical biopsy with histology is painful for patients and involves a delay in order to process the tissue and render a histological diagnosis; other diagnostic tests are available that are less invasive and some are able to provide immediate results. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective: to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of index tests for the detection of oral cancer and OPMD, in people presenting with clinically evident suspicious and innocuous lesions.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVE

to estimate the relative accuracy of the different index tests.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 20 October 2020), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 20 October 2020). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also searched for ongoing trials to 20 October 2020. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. We conducted citation searches, and screened reference lists of included studies for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected studies that reported the diagnostic test accuracy of the following index tests when used as an adjunct to conventional oral examination in detecting OPMD or oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: vital staining (a dye to stain oral mucosa tissues), oral cytology, light-based detection and oral spectroscopy, blood or saliva analysis (which test for the presence of biomarkers in blood or saliva).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance. Eligibility, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out by at least two authors, independently and in duplicate. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Meta-analysis was used to combine the results of studies for each index test using the bivariate approach to estimate the expected values of sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

This update included 63 studies (79 datasets) published between 1980 and 2020 evaluating 7942 lesions for the quantitative meta-analysis. These studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination with: vital staining (22 datasets), oral cytology (24 datasets), light-based detection or oral spectroscopy (24 datasets). Nine datasets assessed two combined index tests. There were no eligible diagnostic accuracy studies evaluating blood or salivary sample analysis. Two studies were classed as being at low risk of bias across all domains, and 33 studies were at low concern for applicability across the three domains, where patient selection, the index test, and the reference standard used were generalisable across the population attending secondary care. The summary estimates obtained from the meta-analysis were: - vital staining: sensitivity 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.90) specificity 0.68 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.77), 20 studies, sensitivity low-certainty evidence, specificity very low-certainty evidence; - oral cytology: sensitivity 0.90 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.94) specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.97), 20 studies, sensitivity moderate-certainty evidence, specificity moderate-certainty evidence; - light-based: sensitivity 0.87 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.93) specificity 0.50 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.68), 23 studies, sensitivity low-certainty evidence, specificity very low-certainty evidence; and - combined tests: sensitivity 0.78 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.94) specificity 0.71 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.84), 9 studies, sensitivity very low-certainty evidence, specificity very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present none of the adjunctive tests can be recommended as a replacement for the currently used standard of a surgical biopsy and histological assessment. Given the relatively high values of the summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for oral cytology, this would appear to offer the most potential. Combined adjunctive tests involving cytology warrant further investigation. Potentially eligible studies of blood and salivary biomarkers were excluded from the review as they were of a case-control design and therefore ineligible. In the absence of substantial improvement in the tests evaluated in this updated review, further research into biomarkers may be warranted.

Flavopereirine Suppresses the Progression of Human Oral Cancer by Inhibiting the JAK-STAT Signaling Pathway via Targeting LASP1

Objective

Flavopereirine has been identified to be a potential anti-cancer agent in several types of human cancer. This study aimed to investigate the anti-cancer activity of flavopereirine in oral cancer.

Methods

The effect of flavopereirine on cell viability of human oral cancer cell lines (BcaCD885 and Tca8113) was evaluated by MTT assay and colony formation assay. Cell apoptosis and cell cycle distribution were detected by flow cytometry. Cell invasion and migration were evaluated by Transwell assay. The expression of LASP1, JAK2, p-JAK2, STST3, p-STST3, STST5 and p-STST5 was evaluated by qRT-PCR and Western blot. In addition, the xenograft mouse model was constructed to determine the anti-cancer role of flavopereirine in vivo.

Results

Flavopereirine significantly inhibited cell proliferation, invasion, migration and EMT process of BcaCD885 and Tca8113 cells, while promoted cell apoptosis in vitro. Flavopereirine markedly decreased the expression levels of p-JAK2, p-STST3 and p-STST5, while increased the expression levels of LASP1. In addition, downregulation of LASP1 significantly increased the expression levels of p-JAK2, p-STAT3 and p-STAT5 compared with si-NC in BcaCD885 cells. Moreover, flavopereirine was found to decrease tumor weight and volume of xenograft tumors in vivo.

Conclusion

Flavopereirine inhibited the progression of oral cancer through inactivating the JAK/STAT signaling pathway by upregulating LASP1, suggesting that flavopereirine might be a potential anti-cancer agent for oral cancer.

Bardoxolone-Methyl (CDDO-Me) Impairs Tumor Growth and Induces Radiosensitization of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cells

Radiotherapy represents a common treatment strategy for patients suffering from oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). However, application of radiotherapy is immanently limited by radio-sensitivity of normal tissue surrounding the tumor sites. In this study, we used normal human epithelial keratinocytes (NHEK) and OSCC cells (Cal-27) as models to investigate radio-modulating and anti-tumor effects of the synthetic triterpenoid 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9,-dien-28-oic acid methyl ester (CDDO-Me). Nanomolar CDDO-Me significantly reduced OSCC tumor xenograft-growth in-ovo applying the chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay. In the presence of CDDO-Me reactive oxygen species (ROS) were found to be reduced in NHEK when applying radiation doses of 8 Gy, whereas ROS levels in OSCC cells rose significantly even without radiation. In parallel, CDDO-Me was shown to enhance metabolic activity in malignant cells only as indicated by significant accumulation of reducing equivalents NADPH/NADH. Furthermore, antioxidative heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) levels were only enhanced in NHEK and not in the OSCC cell line, as shown by immunoblotting. Clonogenic survival was left unchanged by CDDO-Me treatment in NHEK but revealed to be abolished almost completely in OSCC cells. Our results indicate anti-cancer and radio-sensitizing effects of CDDO-Me treatment in OSCC cells, whereas nanomolar CDDO-Me failed to provoke clear detrimental consequences in non-malignant keratinocytes. We conclude, that the observed differential aftermath of CDDO-Me treatment in malignant OSCC and non-malignant skin cells may be utilized to broaden the therapeutic range of clinical radiotherapy.

Novel therapies in the management of oral cancer: An update

An estimated 4% of all cancers are of the oral cavity or oropharyngeal. Presently, management of the oral cancers mainly includes surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy either alone or in combination depending on the individual case. Each of these techniques has their advantages and disadvantages. Surgery demands removal of cancerous tissue causing disfigurement and functional impairment. Radiotherapy has significant side effects like mucositis, myelosuppression, xerostomia and dental caries. With the advent of newer treatment methods like the targeted therapy, immune therapy and gene therapy, treatment outcomes are better with fewer side effects. This has generally improved survival rates and quality of life of cancer patients.

Nonsurgical management of resectable oral cavity cancer in the wake of COVID-19: A rapid review and meta-analysis

•

COVID-19 resource constraints have resulted in treatment delays for oral cancer.

•

Non-surgical treatment may be necessary to provide timely access to care.

•

Definitive CCRT is associated with an increased rate of death in early oral cancer.

•

Neoadjuvant regimens have not shown survival benefit in resectable oral cancer.

Objective

Surgery is the preferred treatment modality for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). However, due to limited resources, re-assessment of treatment paradigms in the wake of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is urgently required. In this rapid review, we described contemporary oncological outcomes for OSCC using non-surgical modalities.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted for articles published between January 1, 2010 and April 1, 2020 on MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL. Studies were included if they contained patients with OSCC treated with either neoadjuvant, induction, or definitive radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or combination thereof, and an outcome of overall survival.

Results

In total, 36 articles were included. Definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy were the focus of 18 articles and neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy were the focus of the other 18 articles. In early stage OSCC, definitive radiotherapy, with or without concurrent chemotherapy, was associated with a significantly increased hazard of death compared to definitive surgery (HR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.56–3.67, I²: 63%). The hazard of death was non-significantly increased with definitive chemoradiotherapy in studies excluding early disease (HR: 1.98, 95% CI: 0.85–4.64, I²: 84%). Two recent randomized control trials have been conducted, demonstrating no survival advantage to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Conclusion

This review suggests that primary radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy are inferior to surgical management for OSCC. Strategies for surgical delay warranting consideration are sparse, but may include several neoadjuvant regimens, recognizing these regimens may not offer a survival benefit over definitive surgery alone.

Inflammatory markers as prognostic factors of recurrence in advanced-stage squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

Background

Multiple immunologic parameters have provided useful prognostic and assessment significance in various cancers, including head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (scc). We sought to identify whether pretreatment inflammatory markers could prognosticate recurrence in patients with advanced (stage iii or iv) head-and-neck scc who underwent therapy with curative intent in a tertiary care centre between January 2010 and December 2012.

Methods

In a chart review, we recorded demographics; primary tumour characteristics; p16 status; pretreatment inflammatory markers, including body mass index (bmi), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (nlr), C-reactive protein (crp), and serum albumin; therapy received; and date of relapse, death, or last follow-up. The main outcome was relapse-free survival (rfs). Overall survival (os) was a secondary outcome.

Results

From among 235 charts reviewed, 118 cases were included: 86 oropharyngeal (50 p16-positive, 18 p16-negative, 17 p16 unavailable, 1 p16 indeterminate), and 32 non-oropharyngeal (7 p16-positive, 19 p16-negative, 6 p16 unavailable). Median follow-up was 2.45 years (25%-75% interquartile range: 1.65-3.3 years). In univariate analysis, p16 status, bmi, modified Glasgow prognostic score, and crp were significant for rfs, but in multivariate analysis, only p16 status, bmi, and crp remained significant. For os, only crp and nlr were significant in both the univariate and multivariate analyses. After adjustment for p16 status, nlr did not remain significant. After adjustment for p16 status, crp remained significant for both rfs and os.

Conclusions

In patients with head-and-neck scc, a stronger prognostic value is associated with human papillomavirus status than with nlr and many other factors, including bmi and albumin. However, even though few of our patients had high crp, serum crp remained significant despite p16-positive status.

Identification of cancer hallmark-associated gene and lncRNA cooperative regulation pairs and dictate lncRNA roles in oral squamous cell carcinoma

Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is the most common malignant tumour in the oral and maxillofacial region. Numerous cancers share ten common traits ("hallmarks") that govern the transformation of normal cells into cancer cells. Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are important factors that contribute to tumorigenesis. However, very little is known about the cooperative relationships between lncRNAs and cancer hallmark-associated genes in OSCC. Through integrative analysis of cancer hallmarks, somatic mutations, copy number variants (CNVs) and expression, some OSCC-specific cancer hallmark-associated genes and lncRNAs are identified. A computational framework to identify gene and lncRNA cooperative regulation pairs (GLCRPs) associated with different cancer hallmarks is developed based on the co-expression and co-occurrence of mutations. The distinct and common features of ten cancer hallmarks based on GLCRPs are characterized in OSCC. Cancer hallmark insensitivity to antigrowth signals and self-sufficiency in growth signals are shared by most GLCRPs in OSCC. Some key GLCRPs participate in many cancer hallmarks in OSCC. Cancer hallmark-associated GLCRP networks have complex patterns and specific functions in OSCC. Specially, some key GLCRPs are associated with the prognosis of OSCC patients. In summary, we generate a comprehensive landscape of cancer hallmark-associated GLCRPs that can act as a starting point for future functional explorations, the identification of biomarkers and lncRNA-based targeted therapy in OSCC.

CD47-SIRPα Signaling Induces Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition and Cancer Stemness and Links to a Poor Prognosis in Patients with Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Background: Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), with high mortality rates, is one of the most diagnosed head and neck cancers. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and the generation of cancer stem cells (CSCs) are two keys for therapy-resistance, relapse, and distant metastasis. Accumulating evidence indicates that aberrantly expressed cluster of differentiation (CD)47 is associated with cell-death evasion and metastasis; however, the role of CD47 in the generation of CSCs in OSCC is not clear. Methods: We investigated the functional roles of CD47 in OSCC cell lines SAS, TW2.6, HSC-3, and FaDu using the bioinformatics approach, immunoblotting, immunofluorescence staining, and assays for cellular migration, invasion, colony, and orosphere formation, as well as radiosensitivity. Results: We demonstrated increased expression of CD47 in OSCC patients was associated with an estimated poorly survival disadvantage (p = 0.0391) and positively correlated with the expression of pluripotency factors. Silencing CD47 significantly suppressed cell viability and orosphere formation, accompanied by a downregulated expression of CD133, SRY-Box transcription factor 2 (SOX2), octamer-binding transcription factor 4 (OCT4), and c-Myc. In addition, CD47-silenced OSCC cells showed reduced EMT, migration, and clonogenicity reflected by increased E-cadherin and decreased vimentin, Slug, Snail, and N-cadherin expression. Conclusion: Of therapeutic relevance, CD47 knockdown enhanced the anti-OSCC effect of radiotherapy. Collectively, we showed an increased CD47 expression promoted the generation of CSCs and malignant OSCC phenotypes. Silencing CD47, in combination with radiation, could provide an alternative and improved therapeutic efficacy for OSCC patients.

Tissue-infiltrating immune cells as prognostic markers in oral squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Various immune cells have been suggested as prognostic markers for cancer patients. In this article, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies assessing the prognostic value of tissue-infiltrating immune cells in oral cancer and discuss the reporting quality of these studies.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search and included studies using immunohistochemistry and survival analysis to assess the prognostic value of tumour-infiltrating T cells, B cells, macrophages, dendritic cells, mast cells and natural killer cells in oral cancer. We performed meta-analysis of studies providing necessary statistical data and investigated the studies’ adherence to the REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK) guidelines.

Results

Of the 1960 articles identified, 33 were eligible for this systematic review and 8 were included in the meta-analysis. CD163+ M2 macrophages and CD57+ natural killer cells were the most promising predictors of survival in oral cancer patients. Many studies lacked important information on their design and conduct.

Conclusion

Deficiencies in the reporting of study design and conduct make it difficult to draw reliable conclusions about the suggested markers. The prognostic value of CD163+ M2 macrophages and CD57+ natural killer cells should be validated in large, standardised studies.

Evidence mapping and quality assessment of systematic reviews on therapeutic interventions for oral cancer

Purpose

This evidence mapping aims to describe and assess the quality of available evidence in systematic reviews (SRs) on treatments for oral cancer.

Materials and methods

We followed the methodology of Global Evidence Mapping. Searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Epistemonikos and The Cochrane Library were conducted to identify SRs on treatments for oral cancer. The methodological quality of SRs was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2 tool. We organized the results according to identified Population–Intervention–Comparison–Outcome (PICO) questions and presented the evidence mapping in tables and a bubble plot.

Results

Fifteen SRs met the eligibility criteria, including 118 individual reports, of which 55.1% were randomized controlled clinical trials. Ten SRs scored “Critically low” methodological quality. We extracted 30 PICOs focusing on interventions such as surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy; 18 PICOs were for resectable oral cancer, of which 8 were reported as beneficial. There were 12 PICOs for unresectable oral cancer, of which only 2 interventions were reported as beneficial.

Conclusion

There is limited available evidence on treatments for oral cancer. The methodological quality of most included SRs scored “Critically low”. The main beneficial treatment reported by authors for patients with resectable oral cancer is surgery alone or in combination with radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Evidence about the benefits of the treatments for unresectable oral cancer is lacking. These findings highlight the need to address future research focused on new treatments and knowledge gaps in this field, and increased efforts are required to improve the methodology quality and reporting process of SRs on treatments for oral cancer.

Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: surgical treatment

BACKGROUND

Surgery is an important part of the management of oral cavity cancer with regard to both the removal of the primary tumour and removal of lymph nodes in the neck. Surgery is less frequently used in oropharyngeal cancer. Surgery alone may be treatment for early-stage disease or surgery may be used in combination with radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy/biotherapy. There is variation in the recommended timing and extent of surgery in the overall treatment regimens of people with these cancers. This is an update of a review originally published in 2007 and first updated in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which surgical treatment modalities for oral and oropharyngeal cancers result in increased overall survival, disease-free survival and locoregional control and reduced recurrence. To determine the implication of treatment modalities in terms of morbidity, quality of life, costs, hospital days of treatment, complications and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 20 December 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 11), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 20 December 2017) and Embase Ovid (1980 to 20 December 2017). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. There were no restrictions on the language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours of the oral cavity or oropharynx, or where separate data could be extracted for these participants, and that compared two or more surgical treatment modalities, or surgery versus other treatment modalities.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted study authors for additional information as required. We collected adverse events data from included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five new trials in this update, bringing the total number of included trials to 12 (2300 participants; 2148 with cancers of the oral cavity). We assessed four trials at high risk of bias, and eight at unclear. None of the included trials compared different surgical approaches for the excision of the primary tumour. We grouped the trials into seven main comparisons.Future research may change the findings as there is only very low-certainty evidence available for all results.Five trials compared elective neck dissection (ND) with therapeutic (delayed) ND in participants with oral cavity cancer and clinically negative neck nodes, but differences in type of surgery and duration of follow-up made meta-analysis inappropriate in most cases. Four of these trials reported overall and disease-free survival. The meta-analyses of two trials found no evidence of either intervention leading to greater overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.72; 571 participants), or disease-free survival (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.11; 571 participants), but one trial found a benefit for elective supraomohyoid ND compared to therapeutic ND in overall survival (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.84; 67 participants) and disease-free survival (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.84; 67 participants). Four individual trials assessed locoregional recurrence, but could not be meta-analysed; one trial favoured elective ND over therapeutic delayed ND, while the others were inconclusive.Two trials compared elective radical ND with elective selective ND, but we were unable to pool the data for two outcomes. Neither study found evidence of a difference in overall survival or disease-free survival. A single trial found no evidence of a difference in recurrence.One trial compared surgery plus radiotherapy with radiotherapy alone, but data were unreliable because the trial stopped early and there were multiple protocol violations.One trial comparing positron-emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) following chemoradiotherapy (with ND only if no or incomplete response) versus planned ND (either before or after chemoradiotherapy), showed no evidence of a difference in mortality (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.31; 564 participants). The trial did not provide usable data for the other outcomes.Three single trials compared: surgery plus adjunctive radiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy; supraomohyoid ND versus modified radical ND; and super selective ND versus selective ND. There were no useable data from these trials.The reporting of adverse events was poor. Four trials measured adverse events. Only one of the trials reported quality of life as an outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Twelve randomised controlled trials evaluated ND surgery in people with oral cavity cancers; however, the evidence available for all comparisons and outcomes is very low certainty, therefore we cannot rely on the findings. The evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions about elective ND of clinically negative neck nodes at the time of removal of the primary tumour compared to therapeutic (delayed) ND. Two trials combined in meta-analysis suggested there is no difference between these interventions, while one trial (which evaluated elective supraomohyoid ND) found that it may be associated with increased overall and disease-free survival. One trial found elective ND reduced locoregional recurrence, while three were inconclusive. There is no evidence that radical ND increases overall or disease-free survival compared to more conservative ND surgery, or that there is a difference in mortality between PET-CT surveillance following chemoradiotherapy versus planned ND (before or after chemoradiotherapy). Reporting of adverse events in all trials was poor and it was not possible to compare the quality of life of people undergoing different surgical treatments.

Induction chemotherapy in patients with resectable laryngeal cancer: A meta-analysis

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) ranks 6th among the most frequently diagnosed carcinomas globally. Laryngeal carcinoma is quite common, and 95% of the cases are SCCs. Since the introduction of larynx-preserving surgery, induction chemotherapy (IC) has played a substantial role. The aim of IC is to shrink or downstage primary laryngeal carcinomas, increasing the chances of complete surgical removal, particularly in cases with advanced but potentially resectable lesions. The aim of the present study was to investigate the value of IC in patients with resectable laryngeal cancer. A meta-analysis was performed of randomized controlled trials (1985-2017) investigating the effect of IC on survival, disease control, larynx-preserving surgery and disease-free survival. Engauge-Digitizer software was used to construct Kaplan-Meier curves and RevMan software was used for the analysis of the data. A total of 12 trials (4,320 patients) were included. There was no significant difference in local recurrence or locoregional control between patients receiving and those not receiving IC (P>0.05). However, the experimental group (IC) exhibited a lower propensity for distant metastasis by 11.7% (95% confidence interval: 10.3-13.3%, P=0.02) compared with the control group (no IC). Among patients with laryngeal cancer, larynx preservation was possible in those who responded well to IC, without a significant decrease in survival compared with radical surgery (P<0.05). Taking into consideration these findings, IC confers an advantage in terms of lowering the risk of distant metastasis in patients with resectable laryngeal carcinoma, and enables laryngeal preservation in responders. Moreover, IC increases the overall survival rate in patients with locally advanced but resectable LC.

Proton Beam Reirradiation for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: Multi-institutional Report on Feasibility and Early Outcomes

PURPOSE

Reirradiation therapy (re-RT) is the only potentially curative treatment option for patients with locally recurrent head and neck cancer (HNC). Given the significant morbidity with head and neck re-RT, interest in proton beam radiation therapy (PBRT) has increased. We report the first multi-institutional clinical experience using curative-intent PBRT for re-RT in recurrent HNC.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective analysis of ongoing prospective data registries from 2 hybrid community practice and academic proton centers was conducted. Patients with recurrent HNC who underwent at least 1 prior course of definitive-intent external beam radiation therapy (RT) were included. Acute and late toxicities were assessed with the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group late radiation morbidity scoring system, respectively. The cumulative incidence of locoregional failure was calculated with death as a competing risk. The actuarial 12-month freedom-from-distant metastasis and overall survival rates were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Ninety-two consecutive patients were treated with curative-intent re-RT with PBRT between 2011 and 2014. Median follow-up among surviving patients was 13.3 months and among all patients was 10.4 months. The median time between last RT and PBRT was 34.4 months. There were 76 patients with 1 prior RT course and 16 with 2 or more courses. The median PBRT dose was 60.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness, [RBE]). Eighty-five percent of patients underwent prior HNC RT for an oropharynx primary, and 39% underwent salvage surgery before re-RT. The cumulative incidence of locoregional failure at 12 months, with death as a competing risk, was 25.1%. The actuarial 12-month freedom-from-distant metastasis and overall survival rates were 84.0% and 65.2%, respectively. Acute toxicities of grade 3 or greater included mucositis (9.9%), dysphagia (9.1%), esophagitis (9.1%), and dermatitis (3.3%). There was 1 death during PBRT due to disease progression. Grade 3 or greater late skin and dysphagia toxicities were noted in 6 patients (8.7%) and 4 patients (7.1%), respectively. Two patients had grade 5 toxicity due to treatment-related bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Proton beam re-RT of the head and neck can provide effective tumor control with acceptable acute and late toxicity profiles likely because of the decreased dose to the surrounding normal, albeit previously irradiated, tissue, although longer follow-up is needed to confirm these findings.

Radiation caries in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients after intensity-modulated radiation therapy: A cross-sectional study

Background/purpose

The exact dose of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) associated with tooth damage is mostly unknown. We aim to evaluate the severity of dental lesions after IMRT and the correlation with the radiation dose to the dentition in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

Materials and methods

This was a cross-sectional study of 42 patients with NPC who completed IMRT in 2011. Each premolar tooth was divided into 13 sites. Teeth were evaluated using a validated index and subsequently categorized at each divided site. The relationship between dose distribution and the caries severity score was analyzed using logistic models. The odds of developing caries damage were evaluated using odds ratios.

Results

A total of 4342 sites from 334 premolar teeth were evaluated. For sites exposed to 30–60 Gy, the odds of developing caries damage were 12–200 times greater compared with sites unexposed to IMRT. A new radiation caries lesion was likely to occur when the dose was >35.8 Gy after 17 days' radiation therapy (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The findings suggest that new tooth damage was likely to occur at doses > 35.8 Gy, and care should be taken throughout the treatment planning process to limit tooth doses to < 50 Gy in NPC patients.

Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral cancers are the sixth most common cancer worldwide, yet the prognosis following a diagnosis of oral cavity or oropharyngeal cancers remains poor, with approximately 50% survival at five years. Despite a sharp increase in research into molecularly targeted therapies and a rapid expansion in the number of clinical trials assessing new targeted therapies, their value for treating oral cancers is unclear. Therefore, it is important to summarise the evidence to determine the efficacy and toxicity of targeted therapies and immunotherapies for the treatment of these cancers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of molecularly targeted therapies and immunotherapies, in addition to standard therapies, for the treatment of oral cavity or oropharyngeal cancers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 3 February 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 1), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 3 February 2015) and EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 3 February 2015). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (clinicaltrials.gov), the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the American Society of Clinical Oncology conference abstracts and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group clinical trials protocols for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours of the oral cavity or oropharynx, and which compared targeted therapy or immunotherapy, plus standard therapy, with standard therapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the electronic searches, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We attempted to contact study authors for missing data or clarification where necessary. We combined sufficiently similar studies in meta-analyses using random-effects models when there were at least four studies and fixed-effect models when fewer than four studies. We obtained or calculated a hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the primary outcomes where possible. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve trials (2488 participants) satisfied the inclusion criteria. In the included trials, 12% of participants (298 participants) had tumours of the oral cavity and 59% (1468 participants) had oropharyngeal tumours. The remaining 29% had tumours of the larynx or hypopharynx and less than 1% had tumours at other sites.No included trial was at low risk of bias; seven had an unclear risk of bias, and five had a high risk of bias. We grouped trials by intervention type into three main comparisons: standard therapy plus epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody (EGFR mAb) therapy (follow-up period 24 to 70 months); standard therapy plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (follow-up period 40 to 60 months) and standard therapy plus immunotherapy (follow-up period 24 to 70 months), all versus standard therapy alone.Moderate quality evidence showed that EGFR mAb therapy may result in 18% fewer deaths when added to standard therapy (HR of mortality 0.82; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.97; 1421 participants, three studies, 67% oropharyngeal tumours, 2% oral cavity tumours).There was also moderate quality evidence that EGFR mAb may result in 32% fewer locoregional failures when added to radiotherapy (RT) (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89; 424 participants, one study, 60% oropharyngeal tumours).A subgroup analysis separating studies by type of standard therapy (radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT)) showed some evidence that adding EGFR mAb therapy to RT may result in a 30% reduction in the number of people whose disease progresses (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.91; 424 participants, one study, 60% oropharyngeal tumours, unclear risk of bias). For the subgroup comparing EGFR mAb plus CRT with CRT alone there was insufficient evidence to determine whether adding EGFR mAb therapy to CRT impacts on progression-free survival (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.32; 891 participants, one study, 70% oropharyngeal tumours, high risk of bias). The high subgroup heterogeneity meant that we were unable to pool these subgroups.There was evidence that adding cetuximab to standard therapy may result in increased skin toxicity and rash (RR 6.56; 95% CI 5.35 to 8.03; 1311 participants, two studies), but insufficient evidence to determine any difference in skin toxicity and rash in the case of nimotuzumab (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.31; 92 participants, one study).There was insufficient evidence to determine whether TKIs added to standard therapy impacts on overall survival (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.57; 271 participants, two studies; very low quality evidence), locoregional control (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.49; 271 participants, two studies; very low quality evidence), disease-free survival (HR 1.51; 95% CI 0.61 to 3.71; 60 participants, one study; very low quality evidence) or progression-free survival (HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.28; 271 participants, two studies; very low quality evidence). We did find evidence of an increase in skin rash (erlotinib: RR 6.57; 95% CI 3.60 to 12.00; 191 participants, one study; lapatinib: RR 2.02; 95% CI 1.23 to 3.32; 67 participants, one study) and gastrointestinal complaints (lapatinib: RR 15.53; 95% CI 2.18 to 110.55; 67 participants, one study).We found very low quality evidence from one small trial that adding recombinant interleukin (rIL-2) to surgery may increase overall survival (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.87; 201 participants, 62% oral cavity tumours, 38% oropharyngeal tumours) and there was insufficient evidence to determine whether rIL-2 impacts on adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found some evidence that adding EGFR mAb to standard therapy may increase overall survival, progression-free survival and locoregional control, while resulting in an increase in skin toxicity for some mAb (cetuximab).There is insufficient evidence to determine whether adding TKIs to standard therapies changes any of our primary outcomes.Very low quality evidence from a single study suggests that rIL-2 combined with surgery may increase overall survival compared with surgery alone.

Improving Quality of Life With Nabilone During Radiotherapy Treatments for Head and Neck Cancers

Objectives:

Patients treated for head and neck carcinomas experience a significant deterioration of their quality of life during treatments because of severe side effects. Nabilone has many properties that could alleviate symptoms caused by radiotherapy and improve patients’ quality of life. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of nabilone versus placebo on the quality of life and side effects during radiotherapy for head and neck carcinomas.

Methods:

Fifty-six patients were randomized to nabilone or placebo. Patients filled the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-H&N35; three independent questionnaires assessing appetite, nausea, and toxicity; and a visual analog scale for pain. These data were collected before radiotherapy, each week during radiotherapy, and 4 weeks after radiotherapy. Patients were weighed every week.

Results:

Nabilone did not lengthen the time necessary for a 15% deterioration of quality of life ( P = .4279), and it was not better than placebo for relieving symptoms like pain ( P = .6048), nausea ( P = .7105), loss of appetite ( P = .3295), weight ( P = .1454), mood ( P = .3214), and sleep ( P = .4438).

Conclusion:

At the dosage used, nabilone was not potent enough to improve the patients’ quality of life over placebo.

Head and Neck Cancers, Version 1.2015

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the 2015 NCCN Guidelines for Head and Neck (H&N) Cancers. These Insights describe the different types of particle therapy that may be used to treat H&N cancers, in contrast to traditional radiation therapy (RT) with photons (x-ray). Research is ongoing regarding the different types of particle therapy, including protons and carbon ions, with the goals of reducing the long-term side effects from RT and improving the therapeutic index. For the 2015 update, the NCCN H&N Cancers Panel agreed to delete recommendations for neutron therapy for salivary gland cancers, because of its limited availability, which has decreased over the past 2 decades; the small number of patients in the United States who currently receive this treatment; and concerns that the toxicity of neutron therapy may offset potential disease control advantages.

Adjunctive tests cannot replace scalpel biopsy for oral cancer diagnosis

DATA SOURCES

Medline, the Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies Register, the Cochrane Oral Health Groups Trials Register, Embase and MEDION.

STUDY SELECTION

Two of the reviewers independently assessed titles abstracts and extracted data. Cross-sectional diagnostic test accuracy studies (or consecutive series) and randomised studies of diagnostic test accuracy that reported the diagnostic test accuracy of vital staining, oral cytology, light-based detection and oral spectroscopy, blood or saliva analysis used as an adjunct to conventional oral examination in detecting PMD or oral squamous cell carcinoma of the lip or oral cavity were considered. Scalpel, punch or fine needle aspiration biopsy with histological diagnosis was the reference test.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Study quality was assessed using a modified version of QUADAS-2. Meta-analysis was used to combine the results of studies for each index test using the bivariate approach to estimate the expected values of sensitivity and specificity. Meta-regressionanalysis was undertaken to explore possible sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies, recruiting 4002 patients were included. No single study could be classified as being at low risk of bias across all domains. Fourteen studies evaluated vital staining, 13 studies oral cytology and 13 studies light-based detection or oral spectroscopy, while six studies assessed two combined index tests. There were no eligible diagnostic accuracy studies evaluating blood or salivary sample analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall quality of the included studies was poor. None of the adjunctive tests can be recommended as a replacement for the currently used standard of a scalpel biopsy and histological assessment. Given the relatively high values of the summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for cytology, this would appear to offer the most potential. Combined adjunctive tests involving cytology warrant further investigation.

Diagnostic tests for oral cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients presenting with clinically evident lesions

BACKGROUND

Oral squamous cell carcinoma is the most common form of malignancy of the lip and oral cavity, often being proceeded by potentially malignant disorders (PMD). Early detection can reduce the malignant transformation of PMD and can improve the survival rate for oral cancer. The current standard of scalpel biopsy with histology is painful for patients and involves a delay whilst histology is completed; other tests are available that are unobtrusive and provide immediate results.

OBJECTIVES

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

To estimate the diagnostic accuracy of index tests for the detection of oral cancer and PMD of the lip and oral cavity, in people presenting with clinically evident lesions.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVE

To estimate the relative accuracy of the different index tests.

SEARCH METHODS

The electronic databases were searched on 30 April 2013. We searched MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to April 2013) and four other electronic databases (the Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies Register, the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, EMBASE (OVID) and MEDION (Ovid)). There were no restrictions on language in the searches of the electronic databases. We conducted citation searches and screened reference lists of included studies for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected studies that reported the diagnostic test accuracy of the following index tests when used as an adjunct to conventional oral examination in detecting PMD or oral squamous cell carcinoma of the lip or oral cavity: vital staining, oral cytology, light-based detection and oral spectroscopy, blood or saliva analysis (which test for the presence of biomarkers in blood or saliva).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance. Eligibility, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out by at least two authors, independently and in duplicate. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using QUADAS-2. Meta-analysis was used to combine the results of studies for each index test using the bivariate approach to estimate the expected values of sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 studies, recruiting 4002 participants, in this review. These studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination with: vital staining (14 studies), oral cytology (13 studies), light-based detection or oral spectroscopy (13 studies). Six studies assessed two combined index tests. There were no eligible diagnostic accuracy studies evaluating blood or salivary sample analysis.The summary estimates for vital staining obtained from the meta-analysis were sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90) with specificity of 0.70 (0.59 to 0.79), with 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. For cytology, sensitivity was 0.91 (0.81 to 0.96) and specificity was 0.91 (0.81 to 0.95) with 12 studies included in the meta-analysis. For light-based detection, sensitivity was 0.91 (0.77 to 0.97) and specificity was 0.58 (0.22 to 0.87) with 11 studies included in the meta-analysis. The relative test accuracy was assessed by adding covariates to the bivariate analysis, no difference in model fit was observed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The overall quality of the included studies was poor. None of the adjunctive tests can be recommended as a replacement for the currently used standard of a scalpel biopsy and histological assessment. Given the relatively high values of the summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for cytology, this would appear to offer the most potential. Combined adjunctive tests involving cytology warrant further investigation.

Clinical assessment to screen for the detection of oral cavity cancer and potentially malignant disorders in apparently healthy adults

BACKGROUND

The early detection and excision of potentially malignant disorders (PMD) of the lip and oral cavity that require intervention may reduce malignant transformations (though will not totally eliminate malignancy occurring), or if malignancy is detected during surveillance, there is some evidence that appropriate treatment may improve survival rates.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral examination (COE), vital rinsing, light-based detection, biomarkers and mouth self examination (MSE), used singly or in combination, for the early detection of PMD or cancer of the lip and oral cavity in apparently healthy adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to April 2013) and four other electronic databases (the Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies Register, the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, EMBASE (OVID), and MEDION) from inception to April 2013. The electronic databases were searched on 30 April 2013. There were no restrictions on language in the searches of the electronic databases. We conducted citation searches, and screened reference lists of included studies for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected studies that reported the diagnostic test accuracy of any of the aforementioned tests in detecting PMD or cancer of the lip or oral cavity. Diagnosis of PMD or cancer was made by specialist clinicians or pathologists, or alternatively through follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance. Eligibility, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out by at least two authors independently and in duplicate. Studies were assessed for methodological quality using QUADAS-2. We reported the sensitivity and specificity of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies, recruiting 68,362 participants, were included. These studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of COE (10 studies), MSE (two studies). One randomised controlled of test accuracy trial directly evaluated COE and vital rinsing. There were no eligible diagnostic accuracy studies evaluating light-based detection or blood or salivary sample analysis (which tests for the presence of bio-markers of PMD and oral cancer). Given the clinical heterogeneity of the included studies in terms of the participants recruited, setting, prevalence of target condition, the application of the index test and reference standard and the flow and timing of the process, the data could not be pooled. For COE (10 studies, 25,568 participants), prevalence in the diagnostic test accuracy sample ranged from 1% to 51%. For the eight studies with prevalence of 10% or lower, the sensitivity estimates were highly variable, and ranged from 0.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.93) to 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.00) with uniform specificity estimates around 0.98 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.00). Estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 0.95 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.97) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.83) for one study with prevalence of 22% and 0.97 (95% CI 0.96 to 0.98) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.77) for one study with prevalence of 51%. Three studies were judged to be at low risk of bias overall; two were judged to be at high risk of bias resulting from the flow and timing domain; and for five studies the overall risk of bias was judged as unclear resulting from insufficient information to form a judgement for at least one of the four quality assessment domains. Applicability was of low concern overall for two studies; high concern overall for three studies due to high risk population, and unclear overall applicability for five studies. Estimates of sensitivity for MSE (two studies, 34,819 participants) were 0.18 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.24) and 0.33 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.65); specificity for MSE was 1.00 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.00) and 0.54 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.69). One study (7975 participants) directly compared COE with COE plus vital rinsing in a randomised controlled trial. This study found a higher detection rate for oral cavity cancer in the conventional oral examination plus vital rinsing adjunct trial arm.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of the target condition both between and within index tests varied considerably. For COE estimates of sensitivity over the range of prevalence levels varied widely. Observed estimates of specificity were more homogeneous. Index tests at a prevalence reported in the population (between 1% and 5%) were better at correctly classifying the absence of PMD or oral cavity cancer in disease-free individuals that classifying the presence in diseased individuals. Incorrectly classifying disease-free individuals as having the disease would have clinical and financial implications following inappropriate referral; incorrectly classifying individuals with the disease as disease-free will mean PMD or oral cavity cancer will only be diagnosed later when the disease will be more severe. General dental practitioners and dental care professionals should remain vigilant for signs of PMD and oral cancer whilst performing routine oral examinations in practice.

Ionizing radiation, ion transports, and radioresistance of cancer cells

The standard treatment of many tumor entities comprises fractionated radiation therapy which applies ionizing radiation to the tumor-bearing target volume. Ionizing radiation causes double-strand breaks in the DNA backbone that result in cell death if the number of DNA double-strand breaks exceeds the DNA repair capacity of the tumor cell. Ionizing radiation reportedly does not only act on the DNA in the nucleus but also on the plasma membrane. In particular, ionizing radiation-induced modifications of ion channels and transporters have been reported. Importantly, these altered transports seem to contribute to the survival of the irradiated tumor cells. The present review article summarizes our current knowledge on the underlying mechanisms and introduces strategies to radiosensitize tumor cells by targeting plasma membrane ion transports.

Comparative effect sizes in randomised trials from less developed and more developed countries: meta-epidemiological assessment

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatment effects from randomised trials conducted in more developed versus less developed countries.

DESIGN

Meta-epidemiological study.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (August 2012).

DATA EXTRACTION

Meta-analyses with mortality outcomes including data from at least one randomised trial conducted in a less developed country and one in a more developed country. Relative risk estimates of more versus less developed countries were compared by calculating the relative relative risks for each topic and the summary relative relative risks across all topics. Similar analyses were performed for the primary binary outcome of each topic.

RESULTS

139 meta-analyses with mortality outcomes were eligible. No nominally significant differences between more developed and less developed countries were found for 128 (92%) meta-analyses. However, differences were beyond chance in 11 (8%) cases, always showing more favourable treatment effects in trials from less developed countries. The summary relative relative risk was 1.12 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.18; P<0.001; I(2)=0%), suggesting significantly more favourable mortality effects in trials from less developed countries. Results were similar for meta-analyses with nominally significant treatment effects for mortality (1.15), meta-analyses with recent trials (1.14), and when excluding trials from less developed countries that subsequently became more developed (1.12). For the primary binary outcomes (127 meta-analyses), 20 topics had differences in treatment effects beyond chance (more favourable in less developed countries in 15/20 cases).

CONCLUSIONS

Trials from less developed countries in a few cases show significantly more favourable treatment effects than trials in more developed countries and, on average, treatment effects are more favourable in less developed countries. These discrepancies may reflect biases in reporting or study design as well as genuine differences in baseline risk or treatment implementation and should be considers when generalising evidence across different settings.

Economic impact of human papillomavirus-associated head and neck cancers in the United States

Cases of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated head and neck cancers are rapidly increasing in the United States. Little is known about the economic burden of these cancers. A literature review identified 7 studies that characterized aspects of the overall economic burden of HPV-associated head and neck cancers in the United States. Other cost studies are detailed to highlight the clinical reality in treating these patients. As the clinical awareness of the role of HPV in head and neck cancers continues, the economic impact of cancers caused by this virus will have implications for the role of various preventive measures.