Surgical quality assurance in head and neck cancer trials: an EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Group position paper based on the EORTC 1420 ‘Best of’ and 24954 ‘larynx preservation’ study

The role of surgery and deescalation for HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer

Recently published and ongoing trials are helping to define the role of transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal cancer. Evidence to date supports the use of surgery as a valuable tool in the multidisciplinary deescalation of low-risk human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

[Surgical Treatment of Oropharyngeal Cancer - Recommendations of the Current German S3 Guideline, Part I]

In general, a trend towards transoral resection (as opposed to classic open approaches) + neck dissection + adjuvant radio- (chemo-) therapy has been observed for oropharyngeal carcinoma over the last 20 years. Techniques of transoral surgery (TOS), including transoral laser microsurgery (TLM) and transoral robotic surgery (TORS) have been propagated in retrospective comparisons with conventional surgery or primary radiochemotherapy as gentle, minimally invasive procedures with good late functional results. Meta-analyses of mostly uncontrolled retrospective analyses suggest that TORS may have better disease-free survival (DFS) and a reduced risk of free flap reconstruction compared with open surgery. TORS (TOS) was associated with fewer tumor-positive resection margins (R1), a lower number of recurrences, fewer intraoperative tracheostomies, a shorter inpatient stay and a shorter duration of postoperative nasal tube feeding compared to open surgery. In principle, based on the best evidence currently available from registry studies, stage I-II oropharyngeal carcinomas can be treated either with primary surgery or radiochemotherapy with a comparable chance of survival. With comparable evidence for stage III and IVa, p16neg. oropharyngeal carcinomas, the majority of authors advocate primary surgery followed by adjuvant radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy as the treatment of first choice. For p16pos. patients the results of registry studies are inconsistent, although the largest registry study on 450 HPV-positive stage III patients shows a significant superiority of primary surgery + adjuvant radiochemotherapy. Since all registry studies did not adjust for smoking status, among other factors, the current data situation should be evaluated with the necessary caution.

Eugene Nicholas Myers' Lecture on Head and Neck Cancer, 2020: The Surgeon as a Prognostic Factor in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing Surgery

This paper is a transcript of the 29 th Eugene N. Myers, MD International Lecture on Head and Neck Cancer presented at the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) in 2020. By the end of the 19 th century, the survival rate in treated patients was 10%. With the improvements in surgical techniques, currently, about two thirds of patients survive for > 5 years. Teamwork and progress in surgical reconstruction have led to advancements in ablative surgery; the associated adjuvant treatments have further improved the prognosis in the last 30 years. However, prospective trials are lacking; most of the accumulated knowledge is based on retrospective series and some real-world data analyses. Current knowledge on prognostic factors plays a central role in an efficient treatment decision-making process. Although the influence of most tumor- and patient-related prognostic factors in head and neck cancer cannot be changed by medical interventions, some environmental factors-including treatment, decision-making, and quality-can be modified. Ideally, treatment strategy decisions should be taken in dedicated multidisciplinary team meetings. However, evidence suggests that surgeons and hospital volume and specialization play major roles in patient survival after initial or salvage head and neck cancer treatment. The metrics of surgical quality assurance (surgical margins and nodal yield) in neck dissection have a significant impact on survival in head and neck cancer patients and can be influenced by the surgeon's expertise. Strategies proposed to improve surgical quality include continuous performance measurement, feedback, and dissemination of best practice measures.

[Radiation or Surgery for HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer? The ORATOR2 Trial - Comparing apples and oranges]

ORATOR2 was a randomized phase II trial aiming to assess an optimal approach for therapy de-escalation in early (T1-T2, N0-N2) human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC). Radiotherapy (RT) (consisting of a reduced dose of 60 Gy with concurrent weekly cisplatin in N+ patients) was compared to trans-oral surgery (TOS) and neck dissection (ND) (with adjuvant reduced-dose RT depending on pathologic findings) in 61 patients. The primary endpoint, overall survival, favored the radiotherapy approach. This was mainly due to 3 mortality events in the surgery arm (2 surgery-related) which resulted in an early trial termination. The authors, who speak on behalf of the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery (working group for oncology) warn to draw conclusions for clinical practice pointing out the main shortages/weaknesses of this trial especially in the surgery arm (at least 1 cm margins, recommending re-operation if not achieved, prohibition of regional or free flaps, high rates of tracheotomy, low rate of TLM). Small patient numbers, a highly selected patient cohort and a short follow-up time further limit this study's relevance. Therefore, patients with HPV-related OPSCC should not receive de-escalating (radiation) therapy outside of clinical trials. When deciding between a surgical or a radio-therapeutical approach, patients should be informed about the pros and cons of both modalities after interdisciplinary consent in a tumor board, as long as clinical trial results` (e. g. EORTC 1420) are pending.

Surgical clinical trials for HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma

The treatment of HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) continues to evolve as multiple ongoing and recently completed clinical trials investigate the role of surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. Current trials are investigating transoral robotic surgery (TORS) in treatment de-escalation protocols in an effort to optimize quality of life, while maintaining historical survival rates. The advantage of TORS is its minimally invasive approach to primary resection of the tumor as well as valuable pathologic staging. The ORATOR trial reported poorer quality of life in patients treated with TORS compared to primary radiotherapy though this was not a clinically meaningful difference. The recently published ECOG 3311 trial showed that surgery can be used to safely de-escalate the adjuvant radiation dose to 50 Gy in intermediate-risk patients. In this review, we summarize and discuss the past and current clinical trials involving surgery in the treatment of HPV-positive OPSCC.

Development of a surgical competency assessment tool for sentinel lymph node dissection by minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer

INTRODUCTION

Sentinel lymph node dissection is widely used in the staging of endometrial cancer. Variation in surgical techniques potentially impacts diagnostic accuracy and oncologic outcomes, and poses barriers to the comparison of outcomes across institutions or clinical trial sites. Standardization of surgical technique and surgical quality assessment tools are critical to the conduct of clinical trials. By identifying mandatory and prohibited steps of sentinel lymph node (SLN) dissection in endometrial cancer, the purpose of this study was to develop and validate a competency assessment tool for use in surgical quality assurance.

METHODS

A Delphi methodology was applied, included 35 expert gynecological oncology surgeons from 16 countries. Interviews identified key steps and tasks which were rated mandatory, optional, or prohibited using questionnaires. Using the surgical steps for which consensus was achieved, a competency assessment tool was developed and subjected to assessments of validity and reliability.

RESULTS

Seventy percent consensus agreement standardized the specific mandatory, optional, and prohibited steps of SLN dissection for endometrial cancer and informed the development of a competency assessment tool. Consensus agreement identified 21 mandatory and three prohibited steps to complete a SLN dissection. The competency assessment tool was used to rate surgical quality in three preselected videos, demonstrating clear separation in the rating of the skill level displayed with mean skills summary scores differing significantly between the three videos (F score=89.4; P<0.001). Internal consistency of the items was high (Cronbach α=0.88).

CONCLUSION

Specific mandatory and prohibited steps of SLN dissection in endometrial cancer have been identified and validated based on consensus among a large number of international experts. A competency assessment tool is now available and can be used for surgeon selection in clinical trials and for ongoing, prospective quality assurance in routine clinical care.

Novel Strategies to Effectively De-escalate Curative-Intent Therapy for Patients With HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer: Current and Future Directions

The treatment of patients with HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer (HPV-OPC) is rapidly evolving and challenging the standard of care of definitive radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin. There are numerous promising de-escalation strategies under investigation, including deintensified definitive chemoradiotherapy, transoral surgery followed by de-escalated adjuvant therapy, and induction chemotherapy followed by de-escalated locoregional therapy. Definitive radiotherapy alone or with cetuximab is not recommended for curative-intent treatment of patients with locally advanced HPV-OPC. The results of ongoing phase III studies are awaited to help answer key questions and address ongoing controversies to transform the treatment of patients with HPV-OPC. Strategies for de-escalation under investigation include the incorporation of immunotherapy and the use of novel biomarkers for patient selection for de-escalation.

Value and Quality of Care in Head and Neck Oncology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The concept of value-based health care (VBHC) was articulated more than a decade ago. However, its clinical implementation remains an on-going process and a particularly demanding one for the domain of head and neck cancer (HNC). These cancers often present with fast growing tumors in functionally and cosmetically sensitive sites and afflict patients with differing circumstances and comorbidity. Moreover, the various treatment modalities and protocols have different effects on functional outcomes. Hence, the interpretation of what constitutes VBHC in head and neck oncology remains challenging.

RECENT FINDINGS

This monograph reviews developments in specific aspects of VBHC for HNC patients, including establishment of registries and quality indices (such as infrastructure, process, and outcome indicators). It emphasizes the importance of the multidisciplinary team, "time to treatment intervals," and adherence to guidelines. The discussion addresses major indicators including survival, quality of life and functional outcomes, and adverse events. Also, strengths and weaknesses of nomograms, prognostic and decision models, and variation of care warrant attention. Health care professionals, together with patients, must properly define quality and relevant outcomes, both for the individual patient as well as the HNC population. It is essential to capture and organize the relevant data so that they can be analyzed and the results used to improve both outcomes and value.

Organ Preservation and Late Functional Outcome in Oropharyngeal Carcinoma: Rationale of EORTC 1420, the "Best of" Trial

Dysphagia represents one of the most serious adverse events after curative-intent treatments with a tremendous impact on quality of life in patients with head and neck cancers. Novel surgical and radiation therapy techniques have been developed to better preserve swallowing function, while not negatively influencing local control and/or overall survival. This review focuses on the current literature of swallowing outcomes after curative treatment strategies. Available results from recent studies relevant to this topic are presented, demonstrating the potential role of new treatment modalities for early- and intermediate-stage oropharyngeal cancers. Based on this, we present the rationale and design of the currently active EORTC 1420 "Best of" trial, and highlight the potential of this study to help prioritizing either surgery- or radiation-based treatment modalities for the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer in the future.

The dawn of robotic surgery in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery

Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) utilizing the da Vinci robotic system has opened a new era for minimally-invasive surgery (MIS) in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. Awareness of the historical steps in developing robotic surgery (RS) and understanding its current application within our field can help open our imaginations to future of the surgical robotics. We compiled a historical perspective on the evolution of surgical robotics, the road to the da Vinci surgical system, and conducted a review of TORS regarding clinical applications and limitations, prospective clinical trials and current status in Japan. We also provided commentary on the future of surgical robotics within our field. Surgical robotics grew out of the pursuit of telerobotics and the advances in robotics for non-medical applications. Today in our field, cancers and diseases of oropharynx and supraglottis are the most common indications for RS. It has proved capable of preserving the laryngopharyngeal function without compromising oncologic outcomes, and reducing the intensity of adjuvant therapy. TORS has become a standard modality for MIS, and will continue to evolve in the future. As robotic surgical systems evolve with improved capabilities in visual augmentation, spatial navigation, miniaturization, force-feedback and cost-effectiveness, we will see further advances in the current indications, and an expansion of indications. By promoting borderless international collaborations that put 'patients first', the bright future of surgical robotics will synergistically expand to the limits of our imaginations.

Quality assurance in head and neck cancer surgery: where are we, and where are we going?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The scope of this review is to summarize current efforts in quality assurance for head and neck cancer surgery. National and international initiatives are summarized and progress in terms of identification of process indicators and outcome indicators delineated.

RECENT FINDINGS

Massive efforts have been made in order to improve quality of head and neck cancer surgery. New guidelines for quality assurance of head and neck cancer surgery in clinical trials have recently been proposed by EORTC.

SUMMARY

Quality assurance programs can be tested within the clearly defined environment of prospective clinical trials. If positive, such programs could be rolled out within national healthcare systems, if feasible. Testing quality programs in clinical trials could be a versatile tool to help head neck cancer patients benefit from such initiatives on a global level.

Trends in Reporting of Swallowing Outcomes in Oropharyngeal Cancer Studies: A Systematic Review

Over the last two decades, dysphagia is increasingly recognized as a significant short-term and long-term issue in oropharyngeal cancer patients. However, there remains a lack of standardization and agreement about reporting swallowing outcomes in studies that assess treatment outcomes in this population. A systematic review was performed following PRISMA Guidelines by searching Pubmed (MEDLINE) and Scopus. The inclusion criteria used included (1) prospective and retrospective clinical studies involving adult patients with oropharyngeal cancer, (2) reports swallowing outcomes, (3) English studies or studies with English translation, (4) full text retrievable and (5) publication between 1990 and 2016. 410 unique studies were identified, and 106 were analyzed. A majority (> 80%) of studies that reported swallowing outcomes were published after 2010. While 75.4% of studies reported subjective outcomes (e.g., patient-reported or clinician-reported outcome measures), only 30.2% of studies presented results of objective instrumental assessment of swallowing. The majority (61%) of studies reported short-term swallowing outcomes at 1 year or less, and only 10% of studies examined 5-year swallowing comes. One study examined late-dysphagia (> 10 years) in the oropharyngeal cancer population. Considerable heterogeneity remains in the reporting of swallowing outcomes after treatment of oropharyngeal cancer despite its importance for quality of life. Studies reporting long-term swallowing outcomes are lacking in the literature, and objective measures of swallowing function remain underutilized and nonstandardized.