Salvage stereotactic reirradiation with or without cetuximab for locally recurrent head-and-neck cancer: a feasibility study

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Recurrent and Oligometastatic Head and Neck Tumours

The treatment of head and neck cancers (HNCs) encompasses a complex paradigm involving a combination of surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment. Locoregional recurrence is a common cause of treatment failure, and few patients are suitable for salvage surgery. Reirradiation with conventional radiation techniques is challenging due to normal tissue tolerance limits and the risk of significant toxicities. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has emerged as a highly conformal modality that offers the potential for cure while limiting the dose to surrounding tissue. There is also growing research that shows that those with oligometastatic disease can benefit from curative intent local ablative therapies such as SBRT. This review will look at published evidence regarding the use of SBRT in locoregional recurrent and oligometastatic HNCs.

Palliative Quad Shot Radiation Therapy with or without Concurrent Immune Checkpoint Inhibition for Head and Neck Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Patients with recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer (HNC) have limited treatment options. 'QuadShot' (QS), a hypofractionated palliative radiotherapy regimen, can provide symptomatic relief and local control and may potentiate the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We compared outcomes of QS ± concurrent ICIs in the palliative treatment of HNC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified patients who received ≥three cycles of QS from 2017 to 2022 and excluded patients without post-treatment clinical evaluation or imaging. Outcomes for patients who received QS alone were compared to those treated with ICI concurrent with QS, defined as receipt of ICI within 4 weeks of QS.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included, of whom 57% received concurrent ICI. Median age was 65.5 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 57.9-77.8), and 50% patients had received prior radiation to a median dose of 66 Gy (IQR: 60-70). Median follow-up was 8.8 months. Local control was significantly higher with concurrent ICIs (12-month: 85% vs. 63%, p = 0.038). Distant control (12-month: 56% vs. 63%, p = 0.629) and median overall survival (9.0 vs. 10.0 months, p = 0.850) were similar between the two groups. On multivariable analysis, concurrent ICI was a significant predictor of local control (HR for local failure: 0.238; 95% CI: 0.073-0.778; p = 0.018). Overall, 23% patients experienced grade 3 toxicities, which was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of QS with concurrent ICIs was well tolerated and significantly improved local control compared to QS alone. The median OS of 9.4 months compares favorably to historical controls for patients with HNC treated with QS. This approach represents a promising treatment option for patients with HNC unsuited for curative-intent treatment and warrants prospective evaluation.

The Evolving Role of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a precise and conformal radiation therapy (RT) that aims to deliver a high dose of radiation to the tumor whilst sparing surrounding normal tissue, making it an attractive option for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients who are not suitable for the traditional long course of RT with comprehensive RT target volume. Definitive SBRT for HNC has been investigated in different settings, including early stage glottis cancer, and as an alternative to brachytherapy boost after external beam RT. It is also used as a primary treatment option for elderly or medically unfit patients. More recently, an SBRT combination with immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting for HNC showed promising results. Salvage or adjuvant SBRT for HNC can be used in appropriately selected cases. Future studies are warranted to determine the optimum dose and fractionation schedules in any of these indications.

Phase 1 Dose Escalation of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Concurrent Cisplatin for Reirradiation of Unresectable, Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck

PURPOSE

Patients with locoregional recurrence of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) have relatively poor outcomes; therefore, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been investigated for this patient population. We performed a phase 1 clinical trial to establish a maximum tolerated dose of SBRT with concurrent cisplatin in previously irradiated locoregional SCCHN.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with recurrent SCCHN who had previously undergone radiation therapy to doses ≥45 Gy to the area of recurrence ≥6 months before enrollment and who were not surgical candidates or refused surgery were eligible. SBRT was delivered every other day for 5 fractions. Starting dose level was 6 Gy × 5 fractions, followed by 7 Gy × 5 fractions and 8 Gy × 5 fractions. Chemotherapy consisted of cisplatin given before every SBRT fraction at a dose of 15 mg/m2. Patients were monitored for dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) that occurred within 3 months from the start of SBRT. Secondary endpoints included locoregional failure, distant metastasis, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were enrolled, with 18 patients evaluable for endpoints. One patient at dose level 1 (30 Gy) died of unknown causes 2 weeks following completion of treatment. Therefore, an additional 3 patients were accrued to the 30-Gy dose level, with no further DLTs observed. Three patients were then accrued at dose level 2 (35 Gy) and 9 patients at dose level 3 (40 Gy) without DLTs. At a median follow-up of 9.5 months, cumulative incidence of locoregional failure at 2 years was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12%-66%), cumulative incidence of distant metastasis was 11% (95% CI, 74%-100%) at 2 years, and overall survival was 22% (95% CI, 9%-53%) at 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Concurrent cisplatin and reirradiation with an SBRT dose of ≤40 Gy was safe and feasible in patients with locoregionally recurrent or second primary SCCHN.

Reirradiation of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: a pragmatic approach, part II: radiation technique and fractionations

INTRODUCTION

Reirradiation (reRT) of local recurrent/second primary tumors of the head and neck represents a potential curative treatment for patients not candidate to a salvage surgery. Aim of the present study is to summarize literature data on modern radiation techniques and fractionations used in this setting of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was conducted on three topics: (1) target volume delineation (2) reRT dose and techniques and (3) ongoing studies. Patients treated with postoperative reRT and palliative intent were not considered for the current analysis.

RESULTS

Recommendations on the target volume contouring have been reported. 3D-Conformal Radiotherapy, Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy, Stereotactic body Radiotherapy Intraoperative Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy and Charged Particles have been analyzed in terms of indication and fractionation in the field of reRT. Ongoing studies on the topic have been reported for IMRT and Charged Particles. Moreover, according to literature data a stepwise approach has been proposed aiming to provide a useful tool to select patients candidate to a curative reRT in daily clinical practice. Two clinical cases were also provided for its application.

CONCLUSION

Different radiation techniques and fractionations can be used for a second course of radiotherapy in patients with recurrent/second primary tumor of head and neck region. Tumor characteristics as well as radiobiological considerations should be take into account to define the best reRT approach.

Metastases-directed stereotactic body radiotherapy in combination with targeted therapy or immunotherapy: systematic review and consensus recommendations by the EORTC-ESTRO OligoCare consortium

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with metastatic cancer, especially when characterised by a low tumour burden (ie, oligometastatic disease), receiving targeted therapy or immunotherapy has become a frequently practised and guideline-supported treatment strategy. Despite the increasing use in routine clinical practice, there is little information on the safety of combining SBRT with modern targeted therapy or immunotherapy and a paucity of high-level evidence to guide clinical management. A systematic literature review was performed to identify the toxicity profiles of combined metastases-directed SBRT and targeted therapy or immunotherapy. These results served as the basis for an international Delphi consensus process among 28 interdisciplinary experts who are members of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) OligoCare consortium. Consensus was sought about risk mitigation strategies of metastases-directed SBRT combined with targeted therapy or immunotherapy; a potential need for and length of interruption to targeted therapy or immunotherapy around SBRT delivery; and potential adaptations of radiation dose and fractionation. Results of this systematic review and consensus process compile the best available evidence for safe combination of metastases-directed SBRT and targeted therapy or immunotherapy for patients with metastatic or oligometastatic cancer and aim to guide today's clinical practice and the design of future clinical trials.

Current radiotherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer in the modern era: a state-of-the-art review

BACKGROUND

In the management of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, local recurrence is a common cause of treatment failure. Only a few patients with recurrent HNC (rHNC) are eligible for salvage surgery and the majority of patients receive systemic therapy and radiotherapy. In recent years, with the development of irradiation technology, radiotherapy for rHNC patients has markedly attracted clinicians' attention and its therapeutic effects on patients with end-stage cancer are worthy of investigation as well.

METHODS

Several studies have investigated the role of radiotherapy in the treatment of rHNC patients. We reviewed retrospective reports and prospective trials published in recent decades that concentrated on the management of rHNC.

RESULTS

A growing body of evidence supported the application of irradiation to rHNC patients. According to the results of this review, current radiotherapy could achieve a better efficacy with a lower incidence of toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy is a promising treatment for rHNC patients.

Retreatment of Recurrent or Second Primary Head and Neck Cancer After Prior Radiation: Executive Summary of the American Radium Society® (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC): Expert Panel on Radiation Oncology - Head and Neck Cancer

BACKGROUND

Re-treatment of recurrent or second primary head and neck cancers occurring in a previously irradiated field is complex. Few guidelines exist to support practice.

METHODS

We performed an updated literature search of peer-reviewed journals in a systematic fashion. Search terms, key questions, and associated clinical case variants were formed by panel consensus. The literature search informed the committee during a blinded vote on the appropriateness of treatment options via the modified Delphi method.

RESULTS

The final number of citations retained for review was 274. These informed five key questions, which focused on patient selection, adjuvant re-irradiation, definitive re-irradiation, stereotactic body radiation (SBRT), and re-irradiation to treat non-squamous cancer. Results of the consensus voting are presented along with discussion of the most current evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This provides updated evidence-based recommendations and guidelines for the re-treatment of recurrent or second primary cancer of the head and neck.

Salvage brachytherapy with or without external beam radiotherapy for oral or oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas in previously irradiated areas: carcinologic and toxicity outcomes of 25 patients

Purpose

The aim of this study was to assess outcomes of salvage brachytherapy for oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma in previously irradiated areas.

Material and methods

This was a retrospective study with 25 patients, treated between 1997 and 2016 for primary (21 cases) or recurrent (4 cases) oral or oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas in previously irradiated areas. Fifteen patients were treated with salvage brachytherapy (BT) alone, while 10 patients additionally received external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Median BT dose was 45 Gy (range, 15-64 Gy), and a median total cumulative dose was 57 Gy (range, 40-70 Gy). Patient age, tumor stage, radiotherapy dose, and time between first treatment and recurrence were analyzed as prognostic factors.

Results

Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months. Patients with less advanced (T1) tumors survived significantly longer (27 vs. 14.5 months, p = 0.046). Five patients experienced a local recurrence, and only one of them was treated with a total dose greater than 60 Gy. In multivariate analysis, patients with T1 lesions had a significant higher OS rate compared to patients with larger lesions (HR = 6.25, 95% CI: 1.18-33.1%, p = 0.031). Patients who received more than 60 Gy had a non-significant, 80% increased OS than those treated with a lower dose (p = 0.072). There was four grade 3 acute toxicities, and no grade 3 or more late toxicities.

Conclusions

Multimodal treatment, including salvage BT, may offer a curative option for selected patients with an acceptable risk of severe toxicity for the treatment of primary or recurrent tumors in previously irradiated areas.

A systematic review and practical considerations of stereotactic body radiotherapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

Stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) is gaining popularity although its use in head and neck cancer (HNC) is not well defined. The primary objective was to review the published evidence regarding the use of stereotactic radiotherapy in HNC.

METHODS

A literature search was performed by using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for eligible studies from 2000 to 2019 and 26 relevant studies were identified.

RESULTS

Literature demonstrates a heterogeneous use of this technique with regards to patient population, primary or salvage treatment, dose fractionation regimens, outcomes and follow-up protocols. Carotid blow out syndrome is a risk as with other forms of reirradiation but alternative treatment regimens may reduce this risk.

CONCLUSION

At present there is a lack of evidence regarding SBRT as a primary treatment option for HNC and definitive answers regarding efficacy and tolerability cannot be provided but there is growing evidence that SBRT reirradiation regimens are safe and effective. In lieu of evidence from large Phase III trials, we define appropriate organ at risk constraints and prescription doses, with accurate plan summation approaches. Prospective randomised trials are warranted to validate improved treatment outcomes and acceptable treatment morbidity.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This article provides a comprehensive review of evidence of use of stereotactic radiotherapy in HNC site (either as a primary treatment or as reirradiation). We also provide an evidence-based approach to the implementation and practical consideration of stereotactic radiotherapy in HNC.

Evolving multidisciplinary treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in India✰

In this article, we highlight the evolution of a multimodal approach in the overall management of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) in India; present advances in technology (newer surgical techniques), novel medical and radiotherapy (RT) approaches; review their roles for an integrated approach for treating SCCHN and discuss the current role of immunotherapy in SCCHN. For locally advanced (LA) SCCHN, the multidisciplinary approach includes surgery followed by RT, with or without chemotherapy (CT) or concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Improved surgical techniques of reconstruction and voice-preservation are being implemented. Advanced forms of high-precision conformal techniques like intensity-modulated radiotherapy are used to deliver highly conformal doses to tumors, sparing the surrounding normal tissue. Compared with RT alone, novel CT regimens and targeted therapeutic agents have the potential to improve locoregional control and survival and reduce treatment-induced toxicities. Several clinical trials have demonstrated efficacy, safety, and quality of life benefits of adding cetuximab to RT regimens in LASCCHN. Studies have also suggested a cetuximab-related laryngeal preservation benefit. At progression, platinum-based CT combined with cetuximab (a monoclonal anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody) is the only validated option available as the first-line therapy. Thus, an integrated multidisciplinary approach plays a key role in maximizing patient outcomes, reduction in treatment related morbidities that consequently impact quality of life of survivors.

Radical external beam re-irradiation in the treatment of recurrent head and neck cancer: Critical review

Management of patients with recurrent head and neck cancer remains a challenge for the surgeon as well as the treating radiation oncologist. Even in the era of modern radiotherapy, the rate of severe toxicity remains high with unsatisfactory treatment results. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and heavy-ion irradiation have all emerged as highly conformal and precise techniques that offer many radiobiological advantages in various clinical situations. Although re-irradiation is now widespread in clinical practice, little is known about the differences in treatment response and toxicity using diverse re-irradiation techniques. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the role of radiation therapy in recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer including patient selection, therapeutic outcome, and risk using different re-irradiation techniques. Critical review of published evidence on IMRT, SBRT, and heavy-ion full-dose re-irradiation is presented including data on locoregional control, overall survival, and toxicity.

Carotid blowout syndrome after reirradiation for head and neck malignancies: a comprehensive systematic review for a pragmatic multidisciplinary approach

AIM

To provide a literature review on risk factors and strategies to prevent acute carotid blowout (CBO) syndrome in patients who underwent reirradiation (reRT) for recurrent head and neck (HN) malignancies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Inclusion criteria were: 1) CBO following reRT in the HN region, 2) description on patient-, tumor- or treatment-related risk factors, 3) clinical or radiological signs of threatened or impending CBO, and 4) CBO prevention strategies.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were selected for the analysis from five hundred seventy-seven records. Results provided indications on clinical, radiological and dosimetric parameters possibly associated with higher risk of CBO. Endovascular procedures (artery occlusion and stenting) to prevent acute massive hemorrhage in high risk patients were discussed.

CONCLUSION

Literature data are still scarce with a low level of evidence. Nevertheless, the present work provides a comprehensive review useful for clinicians as a multidisciplinary pragmatic tool in their clinical practice.

Complex Clinical Decision-Making Process of Re-Irradiation

As patients live longer with their cancer as a result of more effective treatment, recurrences and second malignancies in a previously irradiated field are an increasing challenge. The technical advances that enable high-dose radiation to limited volumes, excluding critical normal tissues, have increased the use of re-irradiation for many tumour sites. Minimising the volume, selecting patients with good performance status, negative metastatic screening and longer disease-free intervals are important principles. Despite this there is a narrow therapeutic window, and careful consideration with open discussion, including the patient, of the probable benefit and the implications of potential toxicities will always be essential. In this overview we evaluate the various radiobiological factors that need to be considered for re-irradiation, tissue recovery and dose tolerances in the setting of re-irradiation and summarise the available literature to guide clinicians in their decision-making for re-irradiation to primary and metastatic site/s of disease.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy as primary treatment for elderly and medically inoperable patients with head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) who are not candidates for definitive treatment represent an increasing challenge, with limited data to guide management. Conventional local therapies such as surgery and chemoradiation can significantly impact quality of life (QoL). There has been limited data published using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as primary treatment in previously unirradiated patients. We hypothesize that SBRT provides high rates of control while limiting toxicity.

METHODS

A total of 66 medically unfit previously unirradiated patients with HNC were treated with SBRT, consisting of 35-40 Gy to gross tumor volume and 30 Gy to clinical target volume in five fractions.

RESULTS

Median age was 80 years. Local control (LC) and overall survival (OS) at 1 year were 73% and 64%. Two patients experienced grade 3 toxicity.

CONCLUSION

SBRT shows acceptable outcomes with relatively low toxicity in previously unirradiated patients with HNC who are medically unfit for conventional treatment. SBRT may provide an aggressive local therapy with high rates of LC and OS while maintaining QoL.

Impact of stereotactic body radiation therapy on geriatric assessment and management for older patients with head and neck cancer using G8

PURPOSE

Management of head and neck cancers (HNC) in older adults is a common but challenging clinical scenario. We assess the impact of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) on survival utilizing the Geriatric-8 (G8) questionnaire.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

171 HNC patients, deemed medically unfit for definitive treatment, were treated with SBRT ± systemic therapy. G8 questionnaires were collected at baseline, at 4-6 weeks, and at 2-3 months post-treatment. Patients were stratified according to their baseline G8 score: <11 as 'vulnerable', 11-14 as 'intermediate', and >14 as 'fit'. Overall survival (OS) was assessed through univariate Kaplan Meier analysis. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine if baseline characteristics affected G8 score changes.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was seventeen months. 60% of patients presented with recurrent HNC, 30% with untreated HNC primaries, and 10% with metastatic non-HNC primaries. Median age was 75 years. Median Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 2. 51% of patients were 'vulnerable', 37% were 'intermediate', and 12% were 'fit' at baseline, with median survival of 13.2, 24.3, and 41.0 months, respectively (p = .004). Patients who saw a decrease in their follow-up G8 score (n = 69) had significantly lower survival than patients who had stable or increased follow-up G8 scores (n = 102), with median survival of 8.6 vs 36.0 months (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The G8 questionnaire may be a useful tool in upfront treatment decision-making to predict prognosis and prevent older patients from receiving inappropriate anti-cancer treatment. Decline in follow-up G8 scores may also predict worse survival and aid in goals of care following treatment.

Patient Outcomes after Reirradiation of Small Skull Base Tumors using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy, Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy, or Proton Therapy

Purpose  The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of patients who received reirradiation for small skull base tumors utilizing either intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and proton radiotherapy (PRT). Methods  Patients who received IMRT, SBRT or PRT reirradiation for recurrent or new small skull base tumors (< 60 cc) between April 2000 and July 2016 were identified. Those with < 3 months follow-up were excluded. Clinical outcomes and treatment toxicity were assessed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the local control (LC), regional control (RC), distant control (DC), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results  Of the 75 patients eligible, 30 (40%) received SBRT, 30 (40%) received IMRT, and 15 (20%) received PRT. The median retreatment volume was 28 cc. The median reirradiation dose was 66 Gy in 33 fractions for IMRT/PRT, and 45 Gy in 5 fractions for SBRT. The median time to reirradiation was 41 months. With a median follow-up of 24 months, the LC, RC, DC, PFS, and OS rates were 84%, 79%, 82%, 60%, and 87% at 1 year, and 75%, 72%, 80%, 49%, and 74% at 2 years. There was no difference in OS between radiation modalities. The 1- and 2-year late Grade 3 toxicity rates were 3% and 11% respectively.. Conclusions  Reirradiation of small skull base tumors utilizing IMRT, PRT, or SBRT provided good local tumor control and low rates of Grade 3 late toxicity. A prospective clinical trial is needed to guide selection of radiation treatment modalities.

Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Locally Recurrent Previously Irradiated Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: An Analysis from the RSSearch® Registry

Objectives

To report on overall survival (OS), local control (LC), dose-outcome relationships, and related toxicities following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for locally recurrent, previously irradiated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (rSCCHN).

Methods

We queried the prospectively-maintained RSSearch® Registry for patients with rSCCHN treated with five-fraction SBRT from January 2008 to November 2016. Patients with non-squamous cell histology, missing registry data regarding prior irradiation, those treated with less than five fractions of SBRT, and those treated with SBRT in primary or boost settings were excluded. LC and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method with comparisons between groups completed using log-rank t-tests and multivariable Cox regression. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine factors predictive of toxicity.

Results

Forty-five rSCCHN patients treated with SBRT delivered in five fractions at 12 radiotherapy centers were identified. Prescription doses ≥ 40 Gy were associated with higher one-year rates of OS, LC, and a higher likelihood of experiencing toxicities. Acute and late toxicity rates were low (22.2% and 15.6%, respectively) and were all Grade 1-2 with only one late Grade 3 esophagitis.

Conclusion

Salvage SBRT for rSCCHN resulted in outcomes comparable to prior single-institutional reports in a multi-institutional cohort across clinical settings with low toxicity, thus supporting more widespread adoption of SBRT with recommended doses ≥ 40 Gy.

[Technical aspects and indications of extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy]

Extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy has developed considerably in recent years and is now an important part of the therapeutic alternatives to be offered to patients with cancer. It offers opportunities that have progressively led physicians to reconsider the therapeutic strategy, for example in the case of local recurrence in irradiated territory or oligometastatic disease. The literature on the subject is rich but, yet, there is no real consensus on therapeutic indications. This is largely due to the lack of prospective, randomized studies that have evaluated this technique with sufficient recoil. We propose a review of the literature on the technical aspects and indications of extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy as an effective and safe treatment for small hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma(sHCC) who were ineligible for surgery or ablation therapies.

Methods

From March 2011 to December 2012, 28 cases with sHCC which were ineligible or refused surgical resection, transplantation or local ablation were treated with CyberKnife SBRT. Median size of tumors was 2.1 cm (range:1.1–3.0 cm), a dose of 10-15Gy per faction was given over 3–6 consecutive days, resulting in a total dose of 35-60Gy.

Results

The median follow-up period was 36 months, with the response rate of complete response (CR) in 17 cases, partial response (PR) in 8 cases, stable disease (SD) in 2 cases and progressive disease (PD) in one case. Overall response rate was 89.28%. Overall survival rates in 1, 2 and 3 years were 92.86, 85.71 and 78.57%, respectively. Local control rates in 1, 2 and 3 years were 96.43, 92.86 and 89.28%, respectively. No grade ≥ 3 hepatic toxicity was observed.

Conclusion

CyberKnife treatment was a safe and effective option for sHCC, which had shown good local control, high overall survival rates and low toxicity. CyberKnife SBRT could be served as an alternative treatment for patients with sHCC which is unsuitable for surgical treatment or local ablation.

A feasibility study on adaptive 18F-FDG-PET-guided radiotherapy for recurrent and second primary head and neck cancer in the previously irradiated territory

PURPOSE

To evaluate feasibility, disease control, survival, and toxicity after adaptive ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emisson tomography (PET) guided radiotherapy in patients with recurrent and second primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

METHODS

A prospective trial investigated the feasibility of adaptive intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) ± concomitant cetuximab in 10 patients. The primary endpoint was achieving a 2-year survival free of grade >3 toxicity in ≥30% of patients. Three treatment plans based on 3 PET/CT scans were consecutively delivered in 6 weeks. The range of dose painting was 66.0-85.0 Gy in the dose-painted tumoral volumes in 30 fractions.

RESULTS

Two-year locoregional and distant control rates were 38 and 76%, respectively. Overall and disease-free survival at 2 years was 20%. No grade 4 or 5 acute toxicity was observed in any of the patients, except for arterial mucosal hemorrhage in 1 patient. Three months after radiotherapy, grade 4 dysphagia and mucosal wound healing problems were observed in 1/7 and 1/6 of patients, respectively. Grade 5 toxicity (fatal bleeding) was seen in 2 patients, at 3.8 and 4.1 months of follow-up. Data on 2‑year toxicity could only be assessed in 1 of the 2 surviving patients, in whom grade 4 mucosal wound healing problems were observed; no other grade >3 toxicity was observed. In this respect, a 30% 2‑year survival free of grade >3 toxicity will not be achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

Adaptive PET-guided reirradiation is feasible. However, due to slow accrual and treatment results that seemed inconsistent with achieving the primary endpoint, the trial was stopped early.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of salvage therapies in locoregional previously irradiated head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to present our evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of salvage therapies for patients with recurrent head and neck cancer.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed with 5 salvage treatment strategies: (1) platinum-based chemotherapy alone; (2) chemotherapy plus cetuximab; (3) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) alone; (4) SBRT plus cetuximab; and (5) intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plus chemotherapy. Clinical parameters were obtained from comprehensive literature review and 2016 Medicare reimbursement. Strategies were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with effectiveness in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and evaluated with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, no treatment strategy was cost-effective at a WTP threshold. The most cost-effective therapy was SBRT alone with $150 866 per QALY gained. If median survival of SBRT alone was ≥11 months, SBRT was considered to be cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

None of the treatment strategies were cost-effective. However, SBRT-based reirradiation has potential to be cost-effective.

A Multi-institutional Comparison of SBRT and IMRT for Definitive Reirradiation of Recurrent or Second Primary Head and Neck Cancer

PURPOSE

Two modern methods of reirradiation, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), are established for patients with recurrent or second primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (rSCCHN). We performed a retrospective multi-institutional analysis to compare methods.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Data from patients with unresectable rSCCHN previously irradiated to ≥40 Gy who underwent reirradiation with IMRT or SBRT were collected from 8 institutions. First, the prognostic value of our IMRT-based recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) separating those patients with unresectable tumors with an intertreatment interval >2 years or those with ≤2 years and without feeding tube or tracheostomy dependence (class II) from other patients with unresected tumors (class III) was investigated among SBRT patients. Overall survival (OS) and locoregional failure were then compared between IMRT and SBRT by use of 2 methods to control for baseline differences: Cox regression weighted by the inverse probability of treatment and subset analysis by RPA classification.

RESULTS

The study included 414 patients with unresectable rSCCHN: 217 with IMRT and 197 with SBRT. The unadjusted 2-year OS rate was 35.4% for IMRT and 16.3% for SBRT (P<.01). Among SBRT patients, RPA classification retained an independent association with OS. On Cox regression weighted by the inverse probability of treatment, no significant differences in OS or locoregional failure between IMRT and SBRT were demonstrated. Analysis by RPA class showed similar OS between IMRT and SBRT for class III patients. In all class II patients, IMRT was associated with improved OS (P<.001). Further subset analysis demonstrated comparable OS when ≥35 Gy was delivered with SBRT to small tumor volumes. Acute grade ≥4 toxicity was greater in the IMRT group than in the SBRT group (5.1% vs 0.5%, P<.01), with no significant difference in late toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Reirradiation both with SBRT and with IMRT appear relatively safe with favorable toxicity compared with historical studies. Outcomes vary by RPA class, which informs clinical trial design. Survival is poor in class III patients, and alternative strategies are needed.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Treatment for Recurrent, Previously Irradiated Head and Neck Cancer

Purpose:

Locally recurrent, previously irradiated primary head and neck tumors have historically been associated with poor outcomes. Stereotactic body radiation therapy has emerged as a feasible and promising treatment option for tumor recurrence, particularly in nonsurgical candidates. This study aimed to assess the associated outcomes of stereotactic body radiation therapy used in this setting.

Methods:

Retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of 25 patients treated with CyberKnife for unresectable, recurrent head and neck cancer in a previously irradiated field. The primary end points evaluated were rates of survival, tumor control, and treatment-related toxicities.

Results:

Median survival of the study population was 7.5 months (range, 1.5-47.0 months). Median survival of the 20 (80%) patients who were treated with curative purpose was 8.3 months. One-year overall survival rate for the entire population was 32%. The respective 1-year and 2-year survival rates for the curative subcohort were 40% and 20%, respectively. Local and locoregional failure occurred in 8 (32%) and 7 (28%) patients, respectively. Low severe acute (4%) and late (6%) treatment-related toxicity rates were observed. No grade 4 or 5 toxicities were observed.

Conclusion:

Stereotactic body radiation therapy is a viable treatment option for patients with unresectable, recurrent head and neck cancer. Significant tumor control rates are achievable with minimal severe toxicity. Although perhaps associated with patient selection and a heterogeneous sample, overall survival of stereotactic body radiation therapy outcomes appears unfavorable.

Carotid Dosimetry and the Risk of Carotid Blowout Syndrome After Reirradiation With Head and Neck Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

To correlate carotid dose and risk of carotid blowout syndrome (CBOS) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), hypothesizing that carotid dose does not correlate with CBOS.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We retrospectively reviewed 186 patients with recurrent, previously irradiated head and neck cancer treated between January 2008 and March 2013. Patients treated early in our experience with incomplete dosimetry were excluded from analysis (n = 111). A total of 75 patients were identified, providing 150 carotid arteries for analysis. Median follow-up was 8 months (range, 1-91 months) for all patients, and 37 months for surviving patients (range, 31-91 months). Patients were treated with linear accelerator-based SBRT to a median dose up to 44 Gy (range, 40-50 Gy) in 5 fractions delivered on a twice-weekly basis. Concurrent cetuximab was used in 63 patients (84%). The bilateral common, internal, and external carotid arteries were delineated 2 cm above and below the planning target volume. The maximum dose to 0.1 cm³ (D_0.1cc), 1 cm³ (D_1cc), and 2 cm³ (D_2cc) of the carotid and the mean carotid dose from SBRT were recorded and analyzed for association with carotid bleeding events, using binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

Median reirradiation interval was 20 months (range, 3-423 months), and median prior radiation dose was 70 Gy (range, 52.5-140 Gy). Sixteen patients (21.3%) received more than 1 course of SBRT, and the cumulative carotid doses from fused summary plans were recorded. The overall median D_0.1cc, D_1cc, D_2cc, and mean carotid doses were 40.8 Gy (interquartile range [IQR], 21.6-47.6 Gy), 26.8 Gy (IQR, 14.1-42.1 Gy), 15.4 Gy (IQR, 8.4-32.7 Gy), and 15.0 Gy (IQR, 8.9-23.3 Gy), respectively. There were a total of 4 bleeding events (5.3%): 2 patients (2.7%) had mucosal bleeds that resolved after embolization of carotid branches, and 2 patients (2.7%) died from complications of CBOS. In the 2 patients with CBOS the D_0.1cc was 48.4 Gy and 47.6 Gy, respectively. There was no significant association between bleeding events and D_1cc (P = .280), D_2cc (P = .571), or mean dose (P = .568). There was a trend toward increased risk of bleeding and D_0.1cc (P = .080).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate a low risk of bleeding after reirradiation with SBRT when 5 fractions are delivered on nonconsecutive days, even when tumor is completely encasing the carotid artery. Although limited by the low number of events, no significant association was found between dose-volume parameters and the risk of carotid bleeding. No CBOS was noted when D_0.1cc was <47.6 Gy.

[Reirradiation of head and neck cancers]

Locoregional relapse in previously irradiated region for head and neck tumours is associated with a bad locoregional and distant prognosis. Reirradiation might be exclusive, or feasible in addition with surgery and/or chemotherapy, according to histopronostic factors. Data show that reirradiation is feasible with some severe toxicity due to the bad prognosis of this situation. Hyperfractionnated regimen with split course or normofractionnated regimen without split course are possible with similar efficacy. If tumour size is small, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy may be considered, and if the treatment centre has proton therapy, it could be proposed because of better organs at risk sparing. There is no standard regarding reirradiation schedules and several trials have to be done in order to determine the best technique. Nevertheless, it is agreed that a total dose of 60Gy (2Gy per fraction) is needed. Other trials testing the association with new systemic agents have to be performed, among them agents targeting the PD1/PD-L1 axis.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) offers a promising opportunity for cure and/or palliation to patients with recurrent head and neck cancer whose comorbidities, performance status, and history of prior treatment may preclude many other salvage options. Stereotactic body radiation therapy appears to have a favorable response and toxicity profile compared with other nonoperative salvage options for recurrent head and neck cancer. However, the risk of severe toxicity remains, with carotid blowout syndrome a unique concern, although the incidence of this complication may be minimized with alternating-day fractionation. The short overall treatment time and low rates of acute toxicity make SBRT an optimal vehicle to integrate with novel systemic therapies, and several phase II studies have used concurrent cetuximab as a radiosensitizer with SBRT with promising results. Ongoing studies aim to evaluate the potential synergistic effect of SBRT with immune checkpoint inhibitors in recurrent head and neck cancer.

Risk of Severe Toxicity According to Site of Recurrence in Patients Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer

PURPOSE

To report a 10-year update of our institutional experience with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for reirradiation of locally recurrent head and neck cancer, focusing on predictors of toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective review was performed on 291 patients treated with SBRT for recurrent, previously irradiated head and neck cancer between April 2002 and March 2013. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of severe acute and late toxicity. Patients with <3 months of follow-up (n=43) or who died within 3 months of treatment (n=21) were excluded from late toxicity analysis.

RESULTS

Median time to death or last clinical follow-up was 9.8 months among the entire cohort and 53.1 months among surviving patients. Overall, 33 patients (11.3%) experienced grade ≥3 acute toxicity and 43 (18.9%) experienced grade ≥3 late toxicity. Compared with larynx/hypopharynx, treatment of nodal recurrence was associated with a lower risk of severe acute toxicity (P=.03), with no significant differences in severe acute toxicity among other sites. Patients treated for a recurrence in the larynx/hypopharynx experienced significantly more severe late toxicity compared with those with oropharyngeal, oral cavity, base of skull/paranasal sinus, salivary gland, or nodal site of recurrence (P<.05 for all). Sixteen patients (50%) with laryngeal/hypopharyngeal recurrence experienced severe late toxicity, compared with 6-20% for other sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage SBRT is a safe and effective option for most patients with previously irradiated head and neck cancer. However, patients treated to the larynx or hypopharynx experience significantly more late toxicity compared with others and should be carefully selected for treatment, with consideration given to patient performance status, pre-existing organ dysfunction, and goals of care. Treatment toxicity in these patients may be mitigated with more conformal plans to allow for increased sparing of adjacent normal tissues.

Conference report on the Indo Global Summit on Head and Neck Oncology (IGSHNO 2017-BMCON-IV), 24-26 February 2017, Jaipur, India

‘The multidisciplinary approach: expanding treatment horizons for head and neck cancer’ was the major theme of the Indo Global Summit on Head and Neck Oncology (IGSHNO 2017-BMCON-IV). The meeting, held in Jaipur (Rajasthan, India) from 24 to 26 February 2017, assembled 600 participants from India and worldwide. It was organised by the Bhagwan Mahaveer Cancer Hospital and Research Centre (BMCHRC), Jaipur. BMCHRC Jaipur is one of the largest superspeciality oncology research and treatment centres in north India. The vision of BMCHRC has been to foster collaboration between oncologists, encouraging dialogue in an open forum that improves the care and outcomes of patients with cancer using the latest advances in cancer treatment. IGSHNO 2017 was part of this aim and vision.

The organising team, including Dr Anil Gupta (Organising Secretary), Dr Lalit Mohan Sharma (Organising Secretary), Dr Pawan Singhal (Chairperson, scientific programme), Dr Tej Prakash Soni (Treasurer, Organising Secretary, Radiotherapy workshop), Dr Umesh Bansal and Dr Dinesh Yadav (Joint Organising Secretary), Dr Anjum Khan (Organising Secretary, Palliative care workshop), Dr Gaurav Pal Singh (Organising Secretary, Dental and prosthodontics workshop) and Dr (Maj Gen) SC Pareek (Medical Director, BMCHRC, Jaipur, India) worked hard for the previous 6 months to make this conference a successful academic event.

IGSHNO 2017, held over three days, is a chance for oncologists from different parts of India to come together and discuss ongoing research, recent announcements and introduce new developments in head and neck cancer. It consisted of 51 lectures, seven debates, 10 panel discussions, oral paper presentations, e-poster sessions, a quiz for postgraduate students, a live surgery workshop, a prosthodentics workshop for dentists, a radiotherapy contouring workshop for radiation oncologists, a pain and palliative care workshop and a meet the expert session—all focusing on the multidisciplinary treatment of head and neck cancer.

Special highlights from IGSHNO 2017 included the radiotherapy contouring workshop, the live surgery workshop by internationally renowned head and neck oncosurgeons, the dental and prosthodontics workshop and the pain and palliative care workshop.

Locoregional Recurrent or Second Primary Head and Neck Cancer: Management Strategies and Challenges

Treatment of patients with locoregional recurrent or second primary head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) has been guided by well-reasoned principles and informed by carefully tested chemotherapy and radiation regimens. However, clinical decision making for this population is complicated by many factors. Although surgery is generally considered the treatment of choice for patients with HNSCC with recurrent disease or new second primary disease in a previously irradiated field, operability of cases is not always straightforward. Postoperative treatment is frequently warranted but carries significant risk. In addition, the rapid rise in the incidence of HPV-associated HNSCC raises the question of whether established treatment paradigms should be re-examined in this population of patients with a much better prognosis than the non-HPV population. Furthermore, new radiation techniques and new systemic agents show early promising results in recent clinical studies, suggesting potential for practice-changing effects in the future management of this disease. This article examines each of the treatment modalities used in the care of patients with HNSCC with recurrent or new second primary disease and provides a perspective to aid clinicians in the management of this disease.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer: A critical review

The management of patients with recurrent head and neck cancers remains a challenging clinical dilemma. Concerns over toxicity with re-irradiation have limited its use in the clinical setting. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a highly conformal and precise type of radiotherapy and has the advantage of sparing normal tissue. Although SBRT is an attractive treatment modality, its use in the clinic is limited, given the technically challenging nature of the procedure. In this review, we attempt to provide a comprehensive overview of the role of re-irradiation in patients with recurrent head and neck cancers, with particular attention to the advent of SBRT and its use with systemic therapies such as cetuximab. In the second portion of this review, we present our systematic review of published experiences with SBRT in recurrent head and neck cancers in an attempt to provide data on response rates (RR), overall survival and toxicity. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 39: 595-601, 2017.

Toxicity of concurrent stereotactic radiotherapy and targeted therapy or immunotherapy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Both stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and immune- or targeted therapy play an increasingly important role in personalized treatment of metastatic disease. Concurrent application of both therapies is rapidly expanding in daily clinical practice. In this systematic review we summarize severe toxicity observed after concurrent treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for English literature published up to April 2016 using keywords "radiosurgery", "local ablative therapy", "gamma knife" and "stereotactic", combined with "bevacizumab", "cetuximab", "crizotinib", "erlotinib", "gefitinib", "ipilimumab", "lapatinib", "sorafenib", "sunitinib", "trastuzumab", "vemurafenib", "PLX4032", "panitumumab", "nivolumab", "pembrolizumab", "alectinib", "ceritinib", "dabrafenib", "trametinib", "BRAF", "TKI", "MEK", "PD1", "EGFR", "CTLA-4" or "ALK". Studies performing SRT during or within 30days of targeted/immunotherapy, reporting severe (⩾Grade 3) toxicity were included.

RESULTS

Concurrent treatment is mostly well tolerated in cranial SRT, but high rates of severe toxicity were observed for the combination with BRAF-inhibitors. The relatively scarce literature on extra-cranial SRT shows a potential risk of increased toxicity when SRT is combined with EGFR-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors and bevacizumab, which was not observed for cranial SRT.

CONCLUSIONS

This review gives a best-possible overview of current knowledge and its limitations and underlines the need for a timely generation of stronger evidence in this rapidly expanding field.

High-dose hypofractionated radiotherapy is effective and safe for tumors in the head-and-neck

OBJECTIVES

High-dose, hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) is sometimes used to treat malignancy in the head-and-neck (HN), both in the curative and palliative setting. Its safety and efficacy have been reported in small studies and are still controversial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the outcomes and toxicities of HFRT, including ultra-high-dose fractionation schemes (⩾8Gray per fraction), for HN malignancies.

RESULTS

A total of 62 sites of measurable gross disease in 48 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up was 54.3months among five survivors and 6.0months in the remaining patients. Median RT dose was 30Gray in 5 fractions; 20/62 lesions (32%) received dose-per-fraction of ⩾8Gray. Overall response rate at first follow-up was 79%. One-year local-progression free rate was 50%. On multivariate analysis for locoregional control, dose-per-fraction ⩾6Gray was associated with control (p=0.04) and previous radiation was associated with inferior control (p=0.04). Patients who achieved complete response to RT had longer survival than those who did not (p=0.01). Increased toxicity rates were not observed among patients treated with dose-per-fraction ⩾8Gray; only re-irradiation increased toxicity rates.

CONCLUSION

Despite the poor prognostic features noted in this cohort of patients with HN malignancies, HFRT was associated with high response rates, good local control, and acceptable toxicity. Sites that were treated with 6Gray per fraction or higher and had not been previously irradiated had the best disease control. A prospective trial is warranted to further refine the use and indications of HFRT in this setting.

Monte Carlo evaluation of tissue heterogeneities corrections in the treatment of head and neck cancer patients using stereotactic radiotherapy

The purpose of this study was to generate Monte Carlo computed dose distributions with the X-ray voxel Monte Carlo (XVMC) algorithm in the treatment of head and neck cancer patients using stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and compare to heterogeneity corrected pencil-beam (PB-hete) algorithm. This study includes 10 head and neck cancer patients who underwent SRT re-irradiation using heterogeneity corrected pencil-beam (PB-hete) algorithm for dose calculation. Prescription dose was 24-40 Gy in 3-5 fractions (treated 3-5 fractions per week) with at least 95% of the PTV volume receiving 100% of the prescription dose. A stereotactic head and neck localization box was attached to the base of the thermoplastic mask fixation for target localization. The gross tumor volume (GTV) and organs-at-risk (OARs) were contoured on the 3D CT images. The planning target volume (PTV) was generated from the GTV with 0 to 5 mm uniform expansion; PTV ranged from 10.2 to 64.3 cc (average = 35.0±17.5 cc). OARs were contoured on the 3D planning CT and consisted of spinal cord, brainstem, optic structures, parotids, and skin. In the BrainLab treatment planning system (TPS), clinically optimal SRT plans were generated using hybrid planning technique (combination of 3D conformal nonco-planar arcs and nonopposing static beams) for the Novalis-Tx linear accelerator consisting of high-definition multileaf collimators (HD-MLCs: 2.5 mm leaf width at isocenter) and 6 MV-SRS (1000 MU/min) beam. For the purposes of this study, treatment plans were recomputed using XVMC algorithm utilizing identical beam geometry, multileaf positions, and monitor units and compared to the corresponding clinical PB-hete plans. The Monte Carlo calculated dose distributions show small decreases (< 1.5%) in calculated dose for D99, Dmean, and Dmax of the PTV coverage between the two algorithms. However, the average target volume encompassed by the prescribed percent dose (Vp) was about 2.5% less with XVMC vs. PB-hete and ranged between -0.1 and 7.8%. The averages for D100 and D10 of the GTV were lower by about 2% and ranged between -0.8 and 3.1%. For the spinal cord, both the maximal dose difference and the dose to 0.35 cc of the structure were higher by an average of 4.2% (ranged 1.2 to -13.6%) and 1.4% (ranged 7.5 to -11.3%), respectively, with XVMC calculation. For the brainstem, the maximal dose dif-ferences and the dose to 0.5 cc of the structure were, on average, higher by 2.4% (ranged 6.4 to -8.0%) and 3.6% (ranged 6.4 to -9.0%), respectively. For the parotids, both the mean dose and the dose to 20 cc of parotids were higher by an average of 3% (ranged -0.2 to -5.9%) and 4% (ranged -0.2 to -8%), respectively, with XVMC calculation. For the optic apparatus, results from both algorithms were similar. However, the mean dose to skin was 3% higher (ranged 0 to -6%), on average, with XVMC compared to PB-hete, although the maximum dose to skin was 2% lower (ranged -5% to 15.5%). The results from our XVMC dose calculations for head and neck SRT patients indicate small to moderate underdosing of the tumor volume when compared to PB-hete calculation. However, Vp was up to 7.8% less for the lower-neck patient with XVMC. Critical structures, such as spinal cord, brainstem, or parotids, could potentially receive higher doses when using XVMC algorithm. Given the proximity to critical structures and the smaller volumes treated with SRT in the region of the head and neck, the differences between XVMC and PB-hete calculation methods may be of clinical interest.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Recurrent Unresectable Head and Neck Cancers

Background

Treatment of locoregional, recurrent head and neck cancers following definitive radiotherapy has evolved during the past 30 years. Brachytherapy as well as protracted courses of systemic therapy and chemoradiotherapy result in 12-month survival rates of 40% to 50% but have high rates of severe toxicity. Given the advancements in radiotherapy targeting and delivery, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been investigated as an alternative treatment option with the potential advantages of reduced treatment time and rates of toxicity.

Methods

The authors reviewed prospective trials and retrospective reports from the past decade addressing the management of locoregional, recurrent, previously radiated head and neck cancers, focusing on SBRT.

Results

The body of evidence is growing in support of reirradiation using SBRT for the treatment of recurrent head and neck cancers. The 1-year survival rates associated with SBRT are promising and similar to those seen with chemotherapy alone and concurrent, conventionally fractionated radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Treatment-related adverse events of reirradiation using SBRT are also similar to other palliative therapies. Late carotid rupture is a relatively rare but concerning late toxicity associated with reirradiation using SBRT.

Conclusions

SBRT is a promising treatment for locoregional recurrent head and neck cancers. It also offers a logistical advantage over other palliative treatments, as it only requires 1 to 2 weeks of treatment.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: an addition to the armamentarium against head and neck cancer

In the recent years, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a potential therapy for head and neck malignancies. Although early results appear to be promising, serious acute and late effects have been observed, mainly in patients who have had prior external beam radiotherapy. This review will discuss the radiobiology of SBRT, clinical rationale and outcomes for SBRT in head and neck cancers and focus on the benefits and potential limitations in both de novo and re-irradiation settings.

SBRT Treatment of Multiple Recurrent Auricular Squamous Cell Carcinomas Following Surgical and Conventional Radiation Treatment Failure

The treatment of recurrent skin cancers of the head and neck following curative doses of radiotherapy and/or surgery is usually palliative radiation therapy (RT) but with mediocre control rates leading to symptomatic local recurrences. We present a 93-year-old male treated with 50 Gy in five fractions for a subauricular cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma who initially underwent partial auriculectomy and accelerated concomitant boost radiotherapy (60 Gy in 21 fractions over 23 days), and then two additional surgeries ending with completion auriculectomy. Re-irradiation with SBRT was well tolerated despite prior high-dose therapy.

A retrospective study of head and neck re-irradiation for patients with recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer: the McGill University experience

Background

We report our experience with patients who received re-irradiation to the head and neck area for locoregional recurrences (LRR) or second primaries (SP) in a previously irradiated field.

Methods

We reviewed 27 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of LRR or SP head and neck carcinoma treated with a second course of radiotherapy between April 2004 and July 2012. The main outcome measures were local control, overall survival, and complications. The results are expressed as actuarial values using the Kaplan–Meier estimates.

Results

The median follow-up time was 24.7 months (range: 11 days–79.3 months). There were 23 males and four females with a median age of 61 years (range: 40–87 years). The actuarial overall survival rates at 1, 2, and 5 years were 77, 59, and 57 %, respectively. The actuarial local control rate was 80, 52, and 52 % at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. Three patients developed systemic metastases. The rate of grade 3 toxicity was 26 %, and that of grade 4 toxicity was 3 %. There were two treatment-related deaths (grade 5 toxicity).

Conclusions

Continuous course re-irradiation in patients with LRR or SP head and neck cancer is feasible with acceptable toxicity. With current encouraging rates of local control and overall survival, this option should be discussed with patients who have few alternative therapeutic options.

Reirradiation in Head and Neck Recurrent or Second Primary Tumor: Efficacy, Safety, and Prognostic Factors

Aims and background

We investigated efficacy, safety, and prognostic factors of reirradiation in patients with recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer.

Methods

Records of 75 consecutive patients treated with reirradiation between August 2005 and December 2013 were reviewed.

Results

Median overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were 29.5 and 33.6 months. Median local control (LC) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 21.7 and 16.2 months. Univariate analysis showed that patients younger than 70 years, with a Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) >90 or with 2 or less comorbidities at time of reirradiation, have a better OS; KPS >90 and biological equivalent dose (BED) >72 Gy positively influenced the PFS. At multivariate analysis, KPS at reirradiation was an independent predictive factor for OS, while BED was an independent predictive factor for CSS and OS. At univariate analysis, patients with planning target volume (PTV) >221 mL had worse LC and PFS rates, with results confirmed at multivariate analysis. The rate of fatal treatment-related adverse events was 6.7% (3 carotid blowout, 1 soft tissue necrosis, and 1 thromboembolic event).

Conclusions

This study confirms the role and outcomes of reirradiation. A careful selection of patients could minimize acute and late side effects and influence survival: elderly patients, with significant medical comorbidities or poor KPS, are worse candidate for reirradiation. Total dose delivered with reirradiation and PTV appear to be other potential prognostic factors. Further studies of dose escalation are needed to establish the total dose that could achieve better LC rates with a safer toxicity profile.

A prospective phase 2 trial of reirradiation with stereotactic body radiation therapy plus cetuximab in patients with previously irradiated recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

PURPOSE

Salvage options for unresectable locally recurrent, previously irradiated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (rSCCHN) are limited. Although the addition of reirradiation may improve outcomes compared to chemotherapy alone, significant toxicities limit salvage reirradiation strategies, leading to suboptimal outcomes. We therefore designed a phase 2 protocol to evaluate the efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plus cetuximab for rSCCHN.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From July 2007 to March 2013, 50 patients >18 years of age with inoperable locoregionally confined rSCCHN within a previously irradiated field receiving ≥60 Gy, with a Zubrod performance status of 0 to 2, and normal hepatic and renal function were enrolled. Patients received concurrent cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) on day -7 and then 250 mg/m(2) on days 0 and +8) plus SBRT (40-44 Gy in 5 fractions on alternating days over 1-2 weeks). Primary endpoints were 1-year locoregional progression-free survival and National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 graded toxicity.

RESULTS

Median follow-up for surviving patients was 18 months (range: 10-70). The 1-year local PFS rate was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 44%-75%), locoregional PFS was 37% (95% CI: 23%-53%), distant PFS was 71% (95% CI: 54%-85%), and PFS was 33% (95% CI: 20%-49%). The median overall survival was 10 months (95% CI: 7-16), with a 1-year overall survival of 40% (95% CI: 26%-54%). At last follow-up, 69% died of disease, 4% died with disease, 15% died without progression, 10% were alive without progression, and 2% were alive with progression. Acute and late grade 3 toxicity was observed in 6% of patients respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT with concurrent cetuximab appears to be a safe salvage treatment for rSCCHN of short overall treatment time.

Stereotactic radiation therapy for skull base recurrences: Is a salvage approach still possible?

AIM

A literature review was performed to analyse the role of stereotactic radiotherapy given in a single shot or in a fractionated fashion for recurrent skull base tumours in order to ascertain if it can be a real salvage approach.

BACKGROUND

The management of recurrent skull base tumours can have a curative or palliative intent and mainly includes surgery and RT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One-thousand-ninety-one articles were found in the search databases and the most relevant of them were analysed and briefly described.

RESULTS

Data on recurrences of meningioma, pituitary adenoma, craniopharyngioma, chordoma and chondrosarcoma, vestibular schwannoma, glomus jugulare tumours, olfactory neuroblastoma and recurrences from head and neck tumours invading the base of skull are reported highlighting the most relevant results in terms of local control, survival, side effects and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, it emerges that SRS and FSRT are effective and safe radiation modalities of realize real salvage treatment for recurrent skull base tumours.

Role of stereotactic body radiotherapy for symptom control in head and neck cancer patients

PURPOSE

Our aim was to determine the efficacy and quality of life outcomes of head and neck (HN) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in a palliative population with significant proportions of de novo HN tumors not amenable to surgery or protracted course of curative radiotherapy (RT).

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospective database identified 21 patients with 24 sites that were treated. Patients were treated with intensity modulated RT (IMRT), usually 7-9 static fields with a 2-3-mm margin from gross tumor volume to planning target volume only with no microscopic margin added. Electronic patient records and treatment plans were reviewed. Basic demographic information was collected. The EORTC QLQ-H&N35 questionnaire was the tool used to collect QOL data both pre- and on-treatment fraction 5. Univariate analysis was performed for predictors of local control (LC) and prognostic factors for overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients had 24 sites that were treated. The median age was 87 (range 25-103) and median KPS was 70. The most common histology was squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) 19/24 (79 %), basal cell carcinoma (BCC) 3/24 (16 %), and melanoma (4 %). The median maximal diameter was 3.7 cm (range 1-10 cm). The most commonly treated site was lymph nodes in the neck 13/24 (54 %), skin 8/24 (33 %), 4/24 (16 %) other HN mucosal primary sites. Of the 24 lesions, 17 (71 %) were de novo, without prior treatment and 7/24 (29 %) were recurrent. The most commonly used dose/fraction (fx) was 40 Gy/5 (fx) (range 35/5fx-48/6fx). Of the 24 lesions, 6 (25 %) had complete response, 16/24 (67 %) had partial response, and 2/24 (8 %) had no response. Control was defined as no further progression after treatment. For the entire cohort, LC at 3, 6, and 9 months were 66, 50, and 33 %, respectively. In the de novo group, 2/16 (12.5 %) had local failures with the LC rate of 94, 94, and 87 % at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year, respectively. In the recurrent group, 4/8 (50 %) had failure with LC rates of 87. 5, 62.5, and 50 % at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year, respectively. Of the 21 patients, 10 died during follow up, with the OS rate at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year of 90, 70, and 60 %, respectively. Being defined "de novo" showed a trend toward statistical significance p = 0.046 for local failure. Overall survival did not show significant difference between de novo and recurrent with a p value of 0.267. No significant prognostic variables for OS were found. Pre-treatment QOL scores for the entire cohort were 53/130 versus 38/130 (lower scores indicating better QOL) scores with a trend toward statistical significance p = 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT is efficacious with improved quality of life within this elderly frail population in the treatment of de novo and recurrent tumors of the head and neck with promising quality of life scores.