Pooled Analysis of Late Toxicity From 2 Randomized Phase 2 Trials of Induction Chemotherapy (IC) and Chemoradiation Therapy (CRT) for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer (LA-HNSCC)

Prevalence and Impact of Computed Tomography-Defined Sarcopenia on Survival in Patients with Human Papillomavirus-Positive Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Systematic Review

Sarcopenia is a known independent prognostic factor for decreased survival in patients with head and neck cancer; yet, its importance for the growing number of younger patients diagnosed with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC+) has not been established. This systematic literature review aimed to determine the prevalence and impact of computed tomography (CT)-defined sarcopenia on survival outcomes for adult OPC+ patients (>18 y) undergoing any treatment modality. Prospective studies were searched using PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Web of Science up until and including February 2022. Bias was assessed using the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool, and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. In total, 9 studies (total pooled OPC+ patients, n  = 744) were identified and included in this review; 2 at low, 6 at moderate, and 1 at high risk of bias. All studies varied in sarcopenia assessment methods and skeletal muscle index threshold cutoff values. These studies demonstrated the cumulative prevalence of sarcopenia for OPC+ patients to be 42.9% (95% CI: 37.8%, 47.9%). While overall survival (3 studies, n = 253) and progression-free survival (1 study, n = 117) was lower in sarcopenic OPC+ patients, this was not statistically significant. GRADE certainty of evidence for impact of pretreatment sarcopenia on overall survival was low and progression-free survival was very low. Although these studies showed there to be a high prevalence of pretreatment sarcopenia in patients with OPC+, which may decrease survival, the impact on progression-free survival is very uncertain. Further, high-quality research utilizing consistent sarcopenia definitions and assessment methods that are conducted specifically in OPC+ is required to strengthen evidence certainty and determine if sarcopenia is an independent prognostic factor for this population.

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

BACKGROUND

Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are the most common cancers arising in the head and neck. Treatment of oral cavity cancer is generally surgery followed by radiotherapy, whereas oropharyngeal cancers, which are more likely to be advanced at the time of diagnosis, are managed with radiotherapy or chemoradiation. Surgery for oral cancers can be disfiguring and both surgery and radiotherapy have significant functional side effects. The development of new chemotherapy agents, new combinations of agents and changes in the relative timing of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy treatments may potentially bring about increases in both survival and quality of life for this group of patients. This review updates one last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma results in improved overall survival, improved disease-free survival and/or improved locoregional control, when incorporated as either induction therapy given prior to locoregional treatment (i.e. radiotherapy or surgery), concurrent with radiotherapy or in the adjuvant (i.e. after locoregional treatment with radiotherapy or surgery) setting.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched 4 bibliographic databases up to 15 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and that evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, we assessed the new included trials for their risk of bias and at least two authors extracted data from them. Our primary outcome was overall survival (time to death from any cause). Secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (time to disease recurrence or death from any cause) and locoregional control (response to primary treatment). We contacted trial authors for additional information or clarification when necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 100 studies with 18,813 participants. None of the included trials were at low risk of bias.  For induction chemotherapy, we reported the results for contemporary regimens that will be of interest to clinicians and people being treated for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to clearly demonstrate a survival benefit from induction chemotherapy with platinum plus 5-fluorouracil prior to radiotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) for death 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.04, P = 0.11; 7427 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), prior to surgery (HR for death 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.60, P = 0.77; 198 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence) or prior to concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) with cisplatin (HR for death 0.71, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.35, P = 0.30; 389 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to support the use of an induction chemotherapy regimen with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil plus docetaxel prior to CRT with cisplatin (HR for death 1.08, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.44, P = 0.63; 760 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence).  There is insufficient evidence to support the use of adjuvant chemotherapy over observation only following surgery (HR for death 0.95, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.22, P = 0.67; 353 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Among studies that compared post-surgical adjuvant CRT, as compared to post-surgical RT, adjuvant CRT showed a survival benefit (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98, P = 0.03; 1097 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Primary treatment with CRT, as compared to radiotherapy alone,  was associated with a reduction in the risk of death (HR for death 0.74, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83, P < 0.00001; 2852 participants, 24 studies; moderate-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review demonstrate that chemotherapy in the curative-intent treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers only seems to be of benefit when used in specific circumstances together with locoregional treatment. The  evidence does not show a clear survival benefit from the use of induction chemotherapy prior to radiotherapy, surgery or CRT. Adjuvant CRT reduces the risk of death by 16%, as compared to radiotherapy alone. Concurrent chemoradiation as compared to radiation alone is associated with a greater than 20% improvement in overall survival; however, additional research is required to inform how the specific chemotherapy regimen may influence this benefit.