Priorities of human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer patients at diagnosis and after treatment

A Hard Truth to Swallow: Critically Evaluating the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) as an Endpoint in Human Papillomavirus-associated Oropharyngeal Cancer Trials

The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), a measure of swallowing-related quality of life, has become the preferred patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in contemporary clinical trials evaluating the experience of human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPVOPSCC) survivors. With many potentially practice-changing studies using the MDADI composite score as either a primary or coprimary endpoint, or as a key secondary endpoint, it is important to understand its psychometric properties as judged by contemporary PROM standards, with a particular focus on its application to contemporary HPVOPSCC populations. In this critical review, we evaluate contemporary HPVOPSCC studies reporting MDADI outcomes, followed by a detailed evaluation of the psychometric properties of the MDADI. Although the focus of this review was the MDADI, the issues discussed are not unique to the MDADI and have broader applicability to the evaluation and assessment of other PROMs currently in use. First, it may be possible to improve administration of the instrument, as related to missing items, scoring, and the number of items required. Second, although in many instances, the MDADI has been intended as a direct or surrogate measure of swallowing physiology, the MDADI composite score captures a broader health-related quality of life construct affected by both swallowing and eating, the latter of which may be affected by a range of nonswallowing treatment-related toxicities. Finally, a clinically meaningful change of 10 in the MDADI composite score, widely accepted and applied to the clinical trial setting, represents an undoubtably clinically relevant difference in unselected head and neck cancer survivors. However, the smallest difference that might be clinically important to a highly functional HPVOPSCC cohort remains uncertain. Understanding the purpose and properties of the MDADI instrument and furthering the sophistication with which we apply it in this population would improve its interpretation in clinical trials.

Sexual Health, sexuality and sexual intimacy in patients with head and neck cancer - A narrative review

Sexuality and sexual intimacy are important aspects of cancer survivorship. In head and neck cancer (HNC), concerns around sexual health, sexuality and sexual intimacy are infrequently raised or addressed in standard HNC consultations, either before embarking on treatment or during survivorship. The changing demographic of HNC patients, largely due to the increasing proportion of patients with human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPVOPSCC), has driven renewed interest in some specific survivorship issues, including sexual behaviours and lifestyles, which may account for both the primary mode of HPV transmission and the younger and less comorbid population affected by this disease. While HNC survivors may have many complex needs in the short and longer term, some patients may prioritise preserving sexual function above other more HNC-specific issues, such as swallowing and xerostomia. Beyond HPVOPSCC, there is evidence to suggest that impairment of sexual health is a pervasive survivorship issue across all HNC cancer types, and this narrative review article highlights publications reporting quantitative assessments of sexual health outcomes in HNC patients. There are also limited studies evaluating whether current sexual health models of care are adequate for HNC patients or whether new or adapted models are needed. Future research will also need to define the impact of our treatments on the sexuality and sexual intimacy concerns of specific HNC cohorts with more granularity to enhance pre- and post-treatment counselling.

Patient-Reported Decisional Regret After Operative Otolaryngology Procedures: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

To review the published literature on decisional regret in adult patients undergoing operative otolaryngology procedures. The primary outcome was decisional regret scale (DRS) scores. DRS scores of 0 indicate no regret, 1-25 mild regret, and >25 moderate to strong/severe regret.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive librarian-designed strategy was used to search MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from inception to September 2023.

REVIEW METHODS

Inclusion criteria consisted of English-language studies of adult patients who underwent operative otolaryngology treatments and reported DRS scores. Data was extracted by two independent reviewers. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were followed. Oxford Centre's Levels of Evidence were used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

In total, 6306 studies were screened by two independent reviewers; 13 studies were included after full-text analysis. Subspecialties comprised: Head and neck (10), endocrine (1), general (1), and rhinology (1). The DRS results of the included studies spanned a mean range of 10.1-23.9 or a median range of 0-20.0. There was a trend toward more decisional regret after large head and neck procedures or when patients underwent multiple treatment modalities. Depression, anxiety, and patient-reported quality of life measures were all correlated with decisional regret. Oxford Centre's Levels of Evidence ranged from 2 to 4.

CONCLUSION

This is the first comprehensive review of decisional regret in otolaryngology. The majority of patients had no or mild (DRS <25) decisional regret after otolaryngology treatments. Future research on pre-operative counseling and shared decision-making to further minimize patient decisional regret is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 134:2562-2567, 2024.

Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Proton Therapy for Oropharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Complex anatomy surrounding the oropharynx makes proton therapy (PT), especially intensity-modulated PT (IMPT), a potentially attractive option due to its ability to reduce the volume of irradiated healthy tissues. Dosimetric improvement may not translate to clinically relevant benefits. As outcome data are emerging, we aimed to evaluate the evidence of the quality of life (QOL) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following PT for oropharyngeal carcinoma (OC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed and Scopus electronic databases (date: 15 February 2023) to identify original studies on QOL and PROs following PT for OC. We employed a fluid strategy in the search strategy by tracking citations of the initially selected studies. Reports were extracted for information on demographics, main results, and clinical and dose factor correlates. Quality assessment was performed using the NIH's Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. The PRISMA guidelines were followed in the preparation of this report.

RESULTS

Seven reports were selected, including one from a recently published paper captured from citation tracking. Five compared PT and photon-based therapy, although none were randomized controlled trials. Most endpoints with significant differences favored PT, including xerostomia, cough, need for nutritional supplements, dysgeusia, food taste, appetite, and general symptoms. However, some endpoints favored photon-based therapy (sexual symptoms) or showed no significant difference (e.g., fatigue, pain, sleep, mouth sores). The PROs and QOL improve following PT but do not appear to return to baseline.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests that PT causes less QOL and PRO deterioration than photon-based therapy. Biases due to the non-randomized study design remain obstacles to a firm conclusion. Whether or not PT is cost-effective should be the subject of further investigation.

Factors that affect quality of life for older people with head and neck cancer: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Quality of life is a critical aspect in the management of older head and neck cancer patients. It needs to be considered alongside survival benefit, treatment burden, and longer-term outcomes. The purpose was to undertake a systematic review of empirical peer-reviewed studies with a primary focus on factors impacting quality of life for older head and neck cancer patients.

METHODS

A systematic review, searching 5 electronic databases (PsychoINFO, MEDLINE, CINHAL, Embase, and Scopus) using PRISMA methodology was conducted. Data was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and a narrative synthesis performed.

RESULTS

Only 10 papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Two main themes emerged: 1) Impact of head and neck cancer on quality of life domains and 2) quality of life in treatment decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

In an era of progressive personalised care, there is an evident need for more qualitative and quantitative studies focusing on quality of life for older head and neck cancer patients. However, older head and neck cancer patients experience notable differences, especially with poorer physical functioning and greater eating and drinking challenges. Quality of life impacts older patients decision-making, treatment planning and intensifies post-treatment support.

Patient Benefit and Quality of Life after Robot-Assisted Head and Neck Surgery

Robotic systems for head and neck surgery are at different stages of technical development and clinical application. Currently, robotic systems are predominantly used for transoral surgery of the pharynx and larynx. Robotic surgery of the neck, the thyroid, and the middle and inner ear is much less common; however, some oncological and functional outcomes have been reported. This article provides an overview of the current state of robot-assisted head and neck surgery with a special emphasis on patient benefit and postoperative quality of life (QoL). The focus is placed on the role of transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for the resection of oropharyngeal carcinomas. For this application, reported long-term outcomes show functional post-operative advantages for selected oropharyngeal cancer patients after TORS compared to open surgery and primary radiotherapy. Since TORS also plays a significant role in the context of potential therapy de-escalation for HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer patients, ongoing trials are presented. Regarding the evaluation of the therapeutic benefit and the QoL of cancer patients, special attention has to be paid to the large degree of variability of individual patients' preferences. Influencing factors and tools for a detailed assessment of QoL parameters are therefore detailed at the beginning of this article. Notably, while some robotic systems for ear and skull base surgery are being developed in Europe, TORS systems are mainly used in North America and Asia. In Europe and Germany in particular, transoral laser microsurgery (TLM) is a well-established technology for transoral tumor resection. Future trials comparing TORS and TLM with detailed investigation of QoL parameters are therefore warranted and might contribute to identifying suitable fields for the application of the different techniques.

Development of a web-based, patient-centered decision aid for oropharyngeal cancer treatment

OBJECTIVES

Many patients diagnosed with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) have the option of radiation- or surgery-based therapy, and would benefit from a treatment decision aid (DA) to make decisions congruent with their personal values. Our objective was to develop a patient-centered DA for patients with OPSCC that is comprehensible, usable, acceptable, and well-designed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Decisional needs from a pilot study of OPSCC survivors and treating physicians were used to inform a web-based prototype DA. A multidisciplinary steering group developed and iteratively revised the DA. Feasibility testing was conducted in two cycles to assess perspectives of stakeholders (medical, radiation and surgical oncologists, patient education experts, and OPSCC survivors). Survey data and open-ended responses were used to evaluate and refine the DA.

RESULTS

16 physicians, 4 patient education experts, and 6 survivors of OPSCC evaluated a web-based DA prototype in two cycles of testing. Participant feedback was used to revise the DA content and design between cycles. The majority of participants across both cycles indicated that the DA was comprehensible (97%), usable (86%), acceptable (78%), and well-designed (93%). Approximately three quarters of respondents indicated that they would use or share the DA in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

We developed the first patient-centered treatment decision aid (DA) designed for patients with OPSCC, to our knowledge. The DA was perceived favorably by stakeholders, with more than three quarters of respondents indicating they would use it in clinical practice. This tool may improve clinical practice as an adjunct to shared decision-making for OPSCC.

Projected Association of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination With Oropharynx Cancer Incidence in the US, 2020-2045

Importance

Oropharynx cancer (OPC) incidence has increased for several decades in the US. It is unclear when and how this trend will be affected by current HPV vaccination trends.

Objective

To assess the association of HPV vaccination with future OPC incidence in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based age-period-cohort analysis obtained OPC incidence data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program from 69 562 patients 34 to 83 years of age diagnosed with OPC. The HPV vaccination data were obtained from the National Immunization Survey-Teen (60 124 participants) and National Health Interview Survey (16 904 participants). Data were collected from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2017. Age-period-cohort forecasting models projected expected 2018 to 2045 OPC incidence under a counterfactual scenario of no HPV vaccination and current levels of HPV vaccination, stratifying by sex. Data analyses were completed by December 2020.

Exposures

Age- and sex-specific cumulative prevalence of HPV vaccination in 2016 to 2017 projected forward.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Projected OPC incidence and number of OPC cases expected to be prevented by HPV vaccination.

Results

Under current HPV vaccination rates, between 2018 and 2045, OPC incidence is projected to decrease in younger individuals (36-45 years of age: from 1.4 to 0.8 per 100 000 population; 46-55 years of age: from 8.7 to 7.2 per 100 000 population) but continue to increase among older individuals (70-83 years of age: from 16.8 to 29.0 per 100 000 population). The association of HPV vaccination with overall OPC incidence through 2045 will remain modest (no vaccination vs vaccination: 14.3 vs 13.8 per 100 000 population in 2045). By 2045 HPV vaccination is projected to reduce OPC incidence among individuals 36 to 45 years of age (men: 48.1%; women: 42.5%) and 46 to 55 years of age (men: 9.0%; women: 22.6%), but among those 56 years or older, rates are not meaningfully reduced. Between 2018 and 2045, a total of 6334 OPC cases will be prevented by HPV vaccination, of which 88.8% of such cases occur in younger age (≤55 years) groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

According to the projections of this population-based age-period-cohort study, current HPV vaccination rates will have a limited association with overall OPC incidence through 2045 because older individuals who have not yet been vaccinated remain at high risk for OPC. However, reductions in OPC incidence should occur among young and middle-aged adults, the group at lowest risk of diagnosis. These findings forecast a continued shift in the landscape of OPC to an older population.

Fear of Cancer Recurrence in Survivors of Human Papillomavirus-Associated Oropharyngeal Carcinoma

PURPOSE

To estimate the prevalence of and characteristics associated with fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) among human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) survivors.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in HPV-OPC survivors ≥12 months from completion of definitive (chemo)radiation therapy (RT/CRT). Eligible patients completed the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory short-form (FCRI-SF), the European Organisation for research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30, MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Head and Neck, and PROMIS Anxiety and Depression short forms. Associations between FCRI-SF scores and other variables were investigated using linear regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 136 HPV-OPC survivors were enrolled; the median age was 61 years (range, 42-87 years), 84% were male, 72% were currently partnered, 83% were current nonsmokers, 67% were regular alcohol consumers, and the median time since treatment was 2.8 years (range, 1.0-5.5 years). Clinical levels of FCR (≥13) were observed in 72 of 135 patients (53%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 45%-62%). Characteristics significantly associated with increasing FCR scores were younger age (-0.9/5 years; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.01; P = .031), lower global quality of life (-0.8/10 unit increase; 95% CI, -1.4 to -0.2; P = .012), higher symptom interference (0.8/unit increase; 95% CI, 0.1-1.5; P = .017), and a higher burden of anxiety (0.4/unit; 95% CI, 0.3-0.5; P <.001) and depression (0.3/unit; 95% CI, 0.1-0.4; P <.001). Other sociodemographic tumor- and treatment-related characteristics were not statistically significant. Compared with patients reporting nonclinical levels of FCR, significantly more patients reporting clinical levels of FCR than expected believed professional psychological assistance would have been beneficial (60% vs 33%; P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical levels of FCR were observed in approximately half of the HPV-OPC survivors. Survivors reporting higher FCR were younger with worse self-reported global quality of life and higher symptom interference and emotional distress. No other patient, tumor, or treatment factors were associated with higher FCR.

Patient-reported quality of life and symptom burden measures in human papillomavirus associated oropharyngeal cancer - A review of the literature and PRO methodology

The emergence of human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer (HPVOPC) has resulted in an explosion of clinical research offering reduced toxicity and improved health-related quality of life (HRQL) through treatment de-escalation. At the heart of this objective are patient-reported outcomes (PROs) which aim to quantify the patient experience, usually through the measurement of HRQL or symptom burden. A number of PRO measures (PROMs) are available to HNC researchers and selection of the optimal instrument relies on a detailed understanding of their content and psychometric properties matched to the clinical endpoint of interest. As PROMs become increasingly favoured as the primary or co-primary endpoints of interest in HNC clinical trials, particularly those focussed on HPVOPC, future treatment paradigms will be determined by these measures and it is imperative that they are applied with sophistication and rigor. This review draws attention to the limitations and challenges our specialty faces in PRO application, analysis and reporting. These shortfalls typically include a reliance on statistical rather than clinically relevant differences, multiple hypothesis testing, a lack of evidence-based minimal clinically important differences for the commonly used tools, as well as variations in PROM selection. The aim of this review is to provide: (1) an overview of PRO/PROM terminology and methodology in the HNC setting; (2) to provide a summary of HRQL and symptom burden reports in the HPVOPC literature; and (3) to draw attention to the unmet research need of refining PROM development, application and interpretation to guide our treatment decisions based on what matters to patients.

De-escalation in HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer: lessons learned from the past? A critical viewpoint and proposal for future research

PURPOSE

Among head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs), oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) was historically thought to be a homogenous entity, mainly caused by excessive alcohol and tobacco consumption. However, the discovery of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection as an independent risk factor for the development of OPC has led to changes in diagnostics and treatment of this cancer. HPV-positive OPC is associated with improved survival and reduced recurrence rates compared to similar stage HPV-negative OPC and HNSCC in general. These favorable outcomes have led the medical and scientific communities to consider de-escalation treatment options in this specific population to spare patients from unnecessary toxicity, without compromising survival. This comment aimed to critically evaluate de-intensification treatment strategies in HPV-related OPC and to propose future treatment approaches as well as trial design.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed.

RESULTS

Among nine published non-surgical de-intensification trials, only three studies had a comparison head-to-head with the standard of care, with two trials demonstrating clear inferiority of de-escalating treatment option (cetuximab-based radiotherapy). Additionally, there has been significant heterogeneity among induction chemotherapy (IC) protocols in de-escalating studies. Also, the toxicity among these studies varies in terms of the manner of reporting (physician vs patient-reported adverse events).

CONCLUSIONS

Data obtained with de-intensified strategies should only serve to help select an appropriate experimental arm for a randomized controlled trial phase III comparison against cisplatin and 70 Gy of radiotherapy. Without a proper randomized trial, there remains the possibility of compromising survival, which raises ethical questions about conducting any de-escalation trial.

Assessing Preferences in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Phase I and II of Questionnaire Development

Shared-decision making for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is challenged by the difficulty to integrate the patient perception of value within the framework of a multidisciplinary team approach. The aim of this study was to develop a questionnaire to assess the preferences of HNSCC patients with respect to the disease trajectory, expected treatment, and toxicities. In accordance with the standardized EORTC Quality of Life Group's methodology for the development of quality of life modules, a phase 1-2 study was envisaged. Following a systematic review of the literature, a consolidated list of 28 issues was administered through a semi-structured interview to 111 patients from 7 institutions in 5 countries. Overall, "cure of disease", "survival", and "trusting in health care professionals" were the 3 most common priorities, being chosen by 87.3%, 73.6% and 59.1% of patients, respectively. When assessing the correlation with the treatment subgroup, the issue of "being thoroughly and sincerely informed about treatments' efficacy and survival expectation" was highly prevalent in an independent manner (71.4%, 75% and 90% of patients in the follow-up, palliative and curative subgroups, respectively). Based on prespecified scoring criteria, a 24-item list was generated. Pending clinical applicability, further testing and validation of the questionnaire are warranted.

Human papillomavirus oropharynx carcinoma: Aggressive de-escalation of adjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

Aggressive dose de-escalated adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in patients with human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV(+)OPSCC).

METHODS

Patients with HPV(+)OPSCC on a phase II clinical trial of primary surgery and neck dissection followed by dose de-escalated RT (N = 79) were compared with a cohort of patients who received standard adjuvant therapy (N = 115). Local recurrence-free, regional recurrence-free, distant metastases-free survival, and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 194 patients, 23 experienced progression at a median of 1.1 years following surgery (interquartile range [IQR] 0.7-2.0; range 0.3-5.4); 10 patients in the de-escalated cohort and 13 patients in the standard cohort. The 3-year PFS rate for the de-escalated cohort was 87%, and in the standard cohort was 90% (hazard ratio [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.50-2.75]).

CONCLUSION

Patients with HPV(+)OPSCC who undergo surgical resection and neck dissection and meet criteria for adjuvant therapy can undergo aggressive dose de-escalation of RT without increasing risk of progression locally, regionally or at distant sites.

Quality of Life Implications After Transoral Robotic Surgery for Oropharyngeal Cancers

Oropharyngeal cancers and their treatment can exquisitely affect a patient's quality of life and functional outcome. Transoral robotic surgery offers a minimally invasive surgical approach that mitigates injury from traditional open surgical approaches and offers a treatment more likely to have short-term side effects compared with nonsurgical treatment. Feeding tube dependence, oral intake, and swallowing questionnaires, in addition to swallowing evaluations provide a snapshot of a patient's current swallowing function. Investigation of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes allows for understanding of their symptomatology and the comparison of different treatment strategies.

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.

The Evolution of Care of Cancers of the Head and Neck Region: State of the Science in 2020

Cancers that arise in the head and neck region are comprised of a heterogeneous group of malignancies that include carcinogen- and human papillomavirus (HPV)-driven mucosal squamous cell carcinoma as well as skin cancers such as cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, melanoma, and Merkel cell carcinoma. These malignancies develop in critical areas for eating, talking, and breathing and are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality despite advances in treatment. Understanding of advances in the management of these various cancers is important for all multidisciplinary providers who care for patients across the cancer care continuum. Additionally, the recent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated adaptations to head and neck cancer care to accommodate the mitigation of COVID-19 risk and ensure timely treatment. This review explores advances in diagnostic criteria, prognostic factors, and management for subsites including head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and the various forms of skin cancer (basal cell carcinoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, Merkel cell carcinoma, and melanoma). Then, this review summarizes emerging developments in immunotherapy, radiation therapy, cancer survivorship, and the delivery of care during the COVID-19 era.

Strategies for communicating oral and oropharyngeal cancer diagnosis: why talk about it?

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to explore the paradigms of disclosing a cancer diagnosis with a focus on oral and oropharyngeal cancer and patient-related considerations.

STUDY DESIGN

A search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was conducted using the following keywords: oral cancer; mouth lesions; oncology; breaking bad news; truth disclosure; and communication skills training. English and Spanish language studies published through October 2019 were included.

RESULTS

The way bad news is conveyed to patients with cancer may affect their comprehension of information, emotional distress, treatment adherence, and health outcomes. Models of communication that are focused on patients' preferences may result in better treatment outcomes. Available protocols, such as SPIKES and ABCDE, have useful recommendations for health care professionals communicating an oral cancer diagnosis. However, it is important to be attentive to the particular information needs of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

When communicating a cancer diagnosis, providers should employ validated methods of information delivery and support for oncology patients. Further studies are needed to evaluate the experiences and preferences of patients with oral cancer during these communications.