Randomized clinical trial of post-operative radiotherapy versus concomitant carboplatin and radiotherapy for head and neck cancers with lymph node involvement

[French national standard for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of upper aero-digestive tract - General principles of treatment]

OBJECTIVES

The management of upper aerodigestive tract cancers is a complex specialty. It is essential to provide an update to establish optimal care. At the initiative of the INCa and under the auspices of the SFORL, the scientific committee, led by Professor Béatrix Barry, Dr. Gilles Dolivet, and Dr. Dominique De Raucourt, decided to develop a reference framework aimed at defining, in a scientific and consensus-based manner, the general principles of treatment for upper aerodigestive tract cancers applicable to all sub-locations.

METHODOLOGY

To develop this framework, a multidisciplinary team of practitioners was formed. A systematic analysis of the literature was conducted to produce recommendations classified by grades, in accordance with the standards of the French National Authority for Health (HAS).

RESULTS

The grading of recommendations according to HAS standards has allowed the establishment of a reference for patient care based on several criteria. In this framework, patients benefit from differentiated care based on prognostic factors they present (age, comorbidities, TNM status, HPV status, etc.), conditions of implementation, and quality criteria for indicated surgery (operability, resectability, margin quality, mutilation, salvage surgery), as well as quality criteria for radiotherapy (target volume, implementation time, etc.). The role of medical and postoperative treatments was also evaluated based on specific criteria. Finally, supportive care must be organized from the beginning and throughout the patients' care journey.

CONCLUSION

All collected data have led to the development of a comprehensive framework aimed at harmonizing practices nationally, facilitating decision-making in multidisciplinary consultation meetings, promoting equality in practices, and providing a state-of-the-art and reference practices for assessing the quality of care. This new framework is intended to be updated every 5 years to best reflect the latest advances in the field.

An umbrella review exploring the effect of radiotherapy for head and neck cancer patients on the frequency of jaws osteoradionecrosis

OBJECTIVE

Efforts have been made to reduce epidemiological indicators of osteoradionecrosis in patients with head and neck cancer over recent years. This umbrella review aims to synthesize the information of the systematic reviews/meta-analyses investigating the effect of radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer on the frequency of osteoradionecrosis and to identify and analyze the gaps in current scientific literature.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review of systematic reviews with and without meta-analysis of intervention studies was conducted. Qualitative analysis of the reviews and their quality evaluation were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 152 articles were obtained, and ten of them were selected for the final analysis, where six were systematic reviews and four were meta-analysis. According to the guide Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (Amstar), eight articles included were of high quality and two of medium quality. These descriptive systematic reviews/meta-analyses included a total of 25 randomized clinical trials, showing that radiotherapy has positive effects on the frequency of osteoradionecrosis. Even though a reduction in the incidence of osteoradionecrosis was observed back in the history, in systematic reviews with meta-analysis, overall effect estimators were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Differential findings are not enough to demonstrate that there is a significant reduction in the frequency of osteoradionecrosis in patients with head and neck cancer treated by radiation. Possible explanations are related to factors such as the type of studies analyzed, indicator of irradiated complication considered, and specific variables included in the analysis. Many systematic reviews did not address publication bias and did identify gaps in knowledge that require further clarification.

Chemoradiation for Locoregionally Advanced Laryngeal Cancer

Laryngeal preservation with combined modality therapy involving radiotherapy and chemotherapy is usually the treatment of choice for patients with good performance status and with locoregionally advanced laryngeal cancer with a functional larynx. Surgical management with total laryngectomy with neck dissection, followed by adjuvant radiation or chemoradiation, is recommended for patients not eligible for laryngeal preservation. This article provides an overview of the current therapeutic approaches used to treat locoregionally advanced laryngeal cancer and outlines other currently investigated therapies.

Using Electronic Dental Records to Assess Osteoradionecrosis Risk in Irradiated Head and Neck Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Over the last 2 decades, investigations have demonstrated a decreased trend in the likelihood of osteoradionecrosis of the jaw (ORNJ) after extraction. The aim of this study was to explore the potential risk factors for ORNJ in irradiated head and neck cancer by using patients' electronic dental records (EDRs).

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer who had irradiation between January 2010 and December 2020 were included in this retrospective cohort analysis. Patient charts showing evidence of "head and neck cancer," "oral cancer," "radiotherapy," "radiation," and "oral complication" were identified by an informatics analyst querying the EDR. Subsequently, the charts were manually reviewed, and data quality was assessed on 3 dimensions: completeness, accuracy, and consistency. The patient, tumor, systemic condition/drug, oral condition, treatment/trauma, and radiation were all categorized as potential risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 359 patients were included. With the exception of radiation-related factors, we found that the data quality was generally sufficient to support the research. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the following factors were significant in predicting the occurrence of ORNJ development in irradiated head and neck cancer: smoking (odds ratio [OR], 9.0; 95% CI, 1.9 to 43.0; P = 0.006), steroid use (OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 1.3 to 30.8; P = 0.021), oral health status (OR, 23.7; 95% CI, 2.7 to 211.0; P = 0.005), and postirradiation extraction (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.0 to 14.4; P = 0.050).

CONCLUSIONS

A 10-y retrospective analysis of data from an EDR revealed that smoking, steroid use, poor oral status, and postirradiation extraction are all factors linked to an increased risk of developing ORNJ. The quality of EDR data may be systematically assessed by determining the completeness, accuracy, and consistency of the underlying data. Radiation-related factors in particular were poorly documented, highlighting the need for collecting or incorporating this information into the EDR.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT

EDRs can be used to identify risk factors for developing ORNJ in irradiated head and neck cancer and can help clinicians with selecting treatments by incorporating risk and complication considerations.

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.

Meta-analysis of chemotherapy in head and neck cancer (MACH-NC): An update on 107 randomized trials and 19,805 patients, on behalf of MACH-NC Group

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy in squamous cell Head and Neck Cancer (MACH-NC) demonstrated that concomitant chemotherapy (CT) improved overall survival (OS) in patients without distant metastasis. We report the updated results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Published or unpublished randomized trials including patients with non-metastatic carcinoma randomized between 1965 and 2016 and comparing curative loco-regional treatment (LRT) to LRT + CT or adding another timing of CT to LRT + CT (main question), or comparing induction CT + radiotherapy to radiotherapy + concomitant (or alternating) CT (secondary question) were eligible. Individual patient data were collected and combined using a fixed-effect model. OS was the main endpoint.

RESULTS

For the main question, 101 trials (18951 patients, median follow-up of 6.5 years) were analyzed. For both questions, there were 16 new (2767 patients) and 11 updated trials. Around 90% of the patients had stage III or IV disease. Interaction between treatment effect on OS and the timing of CT was significant (p < 0.0001), the benefit being limited to concomitant CT (HR: 0.83, 95%CI [0.79; 0.86]; 5(10)-year absolute benefit of 6.5% (3.6%)). Efficacy decreased as patients age increased (p_trend = 0.03). OS was not increased by the addition of induction (HR = 0.96 [0.90; 1.01]) or adjuvant CT (1.02 [0.92; 1.13]). Efficacy of induction CT decreased with poorer performance status (p_trend = 0.03). For the secondary question, eight trials (1214 patients) confirmed the superiority of concomitant CT on OS (HR = 0.84 [0.74; 0.95], p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The update of MACH-NC confirms the benefit and superiority of the addition of concomitant CT for non-metastatic head and neck cancer.

Systematic review of postoperative therapy for resected squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: Executive summary of the American Radium Society appropriate use criteria

BACKGROUND

The aims of this systematic review are to (a) evaluate the current literature on the impact of postoperative therapy for resected squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) on oncologic and non-oncologic outcomes and (b) identify the optimal evidence-based postoperative therapy recommendations for commonly encountered clinical scenarios.

METHODS

An analysis of the medical literature from peer-reviewed journals was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Prospective studies and methodology-based systematic reviews and meta-analyses of postoperative therapy for SCCHN were identified by searching Medline (OVID) and EMBASE (Elsevier) using controlled vocabulary terms (ie, National Library of Medicine Medical Subject Headings [MeSH], EMTREE). Study screening and selection was performed with Covidence software and full-text review. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used by the expert panel to rate the appropriate use of postoperative therapy, and the modified Delphi method was used to come to consensus.

RESULTS

A total of 5660 studies were identified and screened using the title and abstract, leading to 201 studies assessed for relevance using full-text review. After limitation to the eligibility criteria, 101 studies from 1977 to 2020 were identified, including 77 with oncologic endpoints and 24 with function and quality of life endpoints. All studies reported staging prior to the implementation of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC-8).

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective clinical studies and systematic reviews identified through the PRISMA systematic review provided good evidence for consensus statements regarding the appropriate use of postoperative therapy for resected SCCHN. Further research is needed in domains where consensus by the expert panel could not be achieved for the appropriateness of specific postoperative therapeutic interventions.

A Phase 2 Trial of Chemoradiation Therapy Using Weekly Docetaxel for High-Risk Postoperative Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of postoperative concurrent chemoradiation therapy using weekly docetaxel in patients with high-risk oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This is a prospective single-arm study from a single institute in Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China. Patients with locally stage III to IV OSCC who underwent radical surgery with at least 1 high-risk feature were enrolled for the study. High-risk features evaluated included (1) pathologically confirmed positive or close margins in the primary site or extracapsular nodal extension; (2) histologic involvement of ≥2 regional lymph nodes; and (3) locoregional recurrent OSCC (after initial surgery alone) treated with salvage surgery with curative intent. Docetaxel was administered at a dose of 20 mg/m² concurrently with postoperative radiation therapy (total dose 60-66 Gy). The primary outcome was 2-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints included 2-year locoregional progress-free survival, 2-year overall survival (OS), and toxicities.

RESULTS

From March 2016 to February 2018, 91 patients (59 males, 32 females) were recruited. Median age was 59 years (range, 26-70). All patients were included in final analysis. Fifty-eight patients (63.7%) completed the 6 planned cycles of docetaxel, and all patients completed postoperative radiation therapy. With a median follow-up of 24 months, the 2-year DFS and OS were 75.3% (95% confidence interval, 65.7%-84.2%) and 82.4% (95% confidence interval, 73.0%-89.6%), respectively. Patterns of failure were 13 local recurrences, 2 regional lymph nodes recurrences, and 8 distant failures. Seven patients (7.7%) were recorded as having grade 3 oral cavity mucositis. Two patients had grade 3 hypersensitivity reaction. No other grade 3 or higher adverse events, including hematologic toxicities, were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of low-dose weekly docetaxel with concurrent radiation therapy is a tolerable regimen with favorable DFS and OS in patients with high-risk, resected OSCC.

Role of chemotherapy in 5000 patients with head and neck cancer treated by curative surgery: A subgroup analysis of the meta-analysis of chemotherapy in head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of chemotherapy added to a surgical locoregional treatment (LRT) for patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied the sub-group of trials with surgical LRT included in the meta-analysis on chemotherapy in head and neck cancer (MACH-NC). Data from published and unpublished randomized trials comparing the addition of chemotherapy to LRT in HNSCC patients were sought using electronic database searching for the period 1965-2000, hand searching and by contacting experts in the field. Trials with less than 60 patients, or preoperative radiotherapy or where the type of LRT could not be individually determined were excluded. All individual patient data were checked for internal consistency, compared with published reports, and validated with trialists. Data were pooled using a fixed-effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochrane test and I² statistic.

RESULTS

Twenty-four trials were eligible (5000 patients). Chemotherapy improved overall survival (HR = 0.92 [95%CI: 0.85-0.99] p = 0.02). There was a significant interaction between treatment effect and timing of chemotherapy (p = 0.08 at pre-specified threshold of 0.10) with a greater effect for concomitant chemotherapy (HR = 0.79, 95%CI: 0.69-0.92). The benefit of chemotherapy was greater in women (HR_women = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.50-0.80) compared to men (HR_men = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.89-1.04; p for interaction = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis confirmed the benefit of concomitant chemotherapy added to surgical LRT. The role of induction therapy as yet to be determined as it did not improve OS. Women may benefit more than men from chemotherapy.

Management of the Neck in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity and Oropharynx: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

The aim of the current work is to provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and others on the management of the neck in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity and oropharynx.

METHODS

ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, surgery, radiation oncology, and advocacy experts to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 1990 through 2018. Outcomes of interest included survival, regional disease control, neck recurrence, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 124 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. Six clinical scenarios were devised; three for oral cavity cancer and three for oropharynx cancer, and recommendations were generated for each one.

RECOMMENDATIONS

For oral cavity cancers, clinical scenarios focused on the indications for and the hallmarks of a high-quality neck dissection, indications for postoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, and whether radiotherapy alone is sufficient elective treatment of an undissected neck compared with high-quality neck dissection. For oropharynx cancers, clinical scenarios focused on hallmarks of a high-quality neck dissection, factors that would favor operative versus nonoperative primary management, and clarifying criteria for an incomplete response to definitive chemoradiation for which salvage neck dissection would be recommended. Consensus was reached and recommendations were made for all six clinical scenarios. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines .

[Advances in the management of cervical lymphadenopathies of unknown primary with intensity modulated radiotherapy: Doses and target volumes]

The definition of nodal and/or mucosal target volumes for radiation therapy for lymphadenopathies of unknown primary is controversial. Target volumes may include all nodal areas bilaterraly and be pan-mucosal or unilateral, selective, including the sole oropharyngeal mucosa. This review presents current recommendations in light of changes in the TNM classification, Human papillomavirus status and therapeutic advances. We conducted a systematic review of the literature with the following keywords: lymphadenopathy; head and neck; unknown primary and radiation therapy. There are no direct comparative studies between unilateral or bilateral nodal irradiation or pan-mucosal and selective mucosal irradiation. Contralateral lymph node failure rates range from 0 to 6% after unilateral nodal irradiation and 0 and 31% after bilateral irradiation. Occurrence of a mucosal primary varies between 0 and 19.2%. Initial clinical presentation and Human papillomavirus status are critical to define mucosal target volumes. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is recommended (rather than three-dimensional irradiation) to avoid toxicities. Systemic treatments have similar indications as for identified primary head and neck cancers. Failures do not appear superior in case of unilateral nodal irradiation but comparative studies are warranted due to major biases hampering direct comparisons. Human papillomavirus status should be incorporated into the therapeutic strategy and practice-changing TNM staging changes will need to be evaluated.

Radiotherapy Alone or with Concomitant Daily Low-Dose Carboplatin in Locally Advanced, Unresectable Head and Neck Cancer: Definitive Results of a Phase III Study with a Follow-Up Period of up to Ten Years

Aim and background

Radiotherapy is the conventional treatment for locally advanced inoperable head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. However, the poor therapeutic results justify the development of radiochemotherapy combinations. In an attempt to improve local control and survival in patients with stage III and IV unresectable head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and based on the results of our previous dose escalation study, we undertook a prospective multicentric randomized trial.

Materials and methods

From November 1992 through December 1995, a total of 164 patients were randomized to receive radiotherapy alone (arm I) or combined (arm II) with daily low-dose carboplatin.

Results

The 3, 5 and 10-year local-regional recurrence-free survival rates were better in arm II(21.7%, 15.1% and 15.1%, respectively) than in arm I (15%, 10.7% and 10.7%), but without statistical significance (P = 0.11). The 3, 5 and 10-year disease-free survival rates showed the same positive trend for arm II (16%, 6.8% and 6.8% vs 9%, 5.5% and 5.5%, in arm I, respectively), again without statistical significance (P = 0.09). Instead, a statistical advantage was found in overall survival rates at 3, 5 and 10-years (28.9%, 9% and 5.5% in arm II and 11.1%, 6.9% and 6.9% in arm I, respectively) (P = 0.02). The 3, 5 and 10-year local-regional recurrence-free survival rates in stage IV disease were statistically better in arm II (21.5%, 15.9% and 15.9%) than in arm I (12.8%, 7.7% and 7.7%, respectively) (P = 0.04).

Conclusions

Long-term results in both treatment arms of the trial appear less positive than most published series. However, our findings do not exclude that carboplatin may be beneficial, but the benefit in local control must be lower than the 15% assumed to dimension the trial.

The evidence on effectiveness of weekly vs triweekly cisplatin concurrent with radiotherapy in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC): a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to synthesize the current available evidences on the effectiveness of weekly vs triweekly cisplatin concurrent with radiotherapy in the primary and adjuvant treatment of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of literature were undertaken to assess the effectiveness of weekly vs triweekly schedule in primary and adjuvant treatment for HNSCC with adverse risk features. Search of relevant articles from electronic database from 2000 to March 2016 and appraisal of studies were done.

RESULTS

Only one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and six retrospective studies were included in this review. The RCT showed less severe mucositis (75 vs 38.5%, p = 0.012) and more patients receiving at least 200 mg/m² (62.5% vs 88.5%, p = 0.047) of cisplatin in triweekly arm. There was no difference in 1-year progression-free survival (60% vs 71.1%, p = 0.806) and 1-year overall survival (OS) (71.6 vs 79.3%, p = 0.978) between the weekly and triweekly arm. Pooling of data from six studies showed no difference in 5-year progression-free survival (RR 0.84, 95%, CI 0.67-1.07), 5-year OS (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73-1.07), severe renal events (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42-1.04), severe mucositis (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71-1.21), severe dermatitis (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37-1.03), treatment interruptions (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74-1.52) and number of patients receiving at least 200 mg/m² (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.67-1.03).

CONCLUSION

The current evidence showed that weekly schedule is not superior to triweekly in improving oncological outcomes and decreasing early effects of treatment. In the absence of compelling data, triweekly schedule should remain the standard of care while more RCTs are warranted. Advances in knowledge: While some have proposed that low-dose weekly cisplatin is safer and less toxic, this study emphasized that there is no difference in acute toxicity of the two schedules and it is safe to utilize high-dose cisplatin every 3 weeks to reach the threshold dose of 200 mg/m² faster. Uniquely, this study excluded nasopharyngeal cancer patients as the biology and treatment response are different with other HNSCC.

Systemic therapy in the curative treatment of head and neck squamous cell cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review the available evidence and make recommendations regarding use of systemically administered drugs in combination or in sequence with radiation (RT) and/or surgery for cure and/or organ preservation in patients with locally advanced nonmetastatic (Stage III to IVB) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN).

METHOD

Recognizing the Meta-analysis of Chemotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer (MACH-NC) group reports have de facto guided practice since 2000, we searched for systematic reviews in the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published from January 2000 to February 2015 in reference to 4 research questions. A search was also conducted for randomized trials (RCTs) up to February 2015 not included in the meta-analyses.

RESULT

The MACH-NC reports, 5 additional meta-analyses, and 30 RCTs not included by MACH-NC were identified. For chemotherapy, MACH-NC findings showing improved overall survival with concomitant chemoRT did not require modification. High-dose cisplatin was most commonly studied. We confirmed this benefit with cisplatin monotherapy in patients treated with with postoperative concurrent chemoRT. Other than cetuximab, no targeted agents and radiosensitizers studied in RCTs were shown effective. TPF induction chemotherapy was superior to PF for tumor response and larynx preservation but not survival. Larynx preservation was reported with both CRT and induction chemotherapy approaches.

CONCLUSION

ChemoRT with cisplatin at least 40 mg/m2 per week given as radical or postoperative adjuvant remains a standard treatment approach for LASCCHN that improves overall survival but increases toxicity. 5-FU plus platinum is supported by less data but may be a reasonable alternative for patients unsuitable for cisplatin. Of note, stratification of outcomes by HPV-status was not available but outcomes for oropharynx cancer appeared similar to other subsites in chemoRT RCTs. No RCTs have yet demonstrated superiority or non-inferiority of cetuximab-RT to CRT. In view of this, cetuximab-RT is suggested only for patients not candidates for CRT. Taxane-based triplet induction chemotherapy is superior to doublets for rapid tumour downsizing and for larynx preservation, but does not improve overall survival and should be used with primary G-CSF prophylaxis. Further investigation of induction approaches for larynx preservation may be warranted.

Radiotherapy potentiation with weekly cisplatin compared to standard every 3 weeks cisplatin chemotherapy for locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Despite its toxicity, cisplatin every 3 weeks (q3w) is the standard potentiation of chemo-radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. This study aimed to determine whether weekly cisplatin (q1w) could be a safe and effective alternative.

Patients and methods

Two hundred and sixty-two patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, irradiated in our institution with cisplatin (q1w or q3w) between January 2004 and December 2008, were retrospectively included. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated. Survival distributions were estimated by Kaplan–Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Prognostic effect of chemo-radiotherapy was explored using Cox model.

Results

A total of 165 and 97 patients received q1w and q3w cisplatin, respectively. Median age, stage at diagnosis, alcohol consumption, intensity-modulated radiation therapy use, median weight, and renal failure before radiotherapy were significantly different, showing lower risk in the q3w group. Q3w cisplatin was found to be more toxic in terms of weight loss, renal failure, worse chemotherapy plan completion, and grade 3/4 mucositis and dermatitis, with more patients requiring analgesics, secondary hospitalization, and radiotherapy interruption (≥3 days), and patients affected by long-term toxicities. With a median follow-up of 73 months (95% confidence interval [CI] [68.9–76.2]), OS was found to be significantly better with q3w (5 years OS: 62.3%; 95% CI [51.6–71.3]) than with q1w cisplatin (5 years OS: 52.6%; 95% CI [44.5–60.0]) (log-rank P=0.0146). More number of patients treated according to the q1w schedule experienced a recurrence: 47.3% vs 30.9% (P=0.009). Thus, the PFS for q3w schedule was found to be globally better (5 years PFS: 55.8%; 95% CI [45.0–65.3]) than for q1w schedule (5 years PFS: 43.6%; 95% CI [35.9–51.0]) (log-rank P=0.0161). However, both multivariate analyses, OS and PFS, produce no significant hazard ratio for chemo-radiotherapy modality once adjusted on unbalanced covariates according to the descriptive analysis.

Conclusion

Though q1w seemed to be safer than q3w according to the descriptive analysis, multivariate analyses failed to conclude about its efficiency. Therefore, we conclude that the q3w schedule should remain the standard and prospective comparisons are needed.

[Squamous cell carcinoma of the hypopharynx and larynx: evidence-based care]

Squamous cell carcinomas of larynx and hypopharynx can be treated by surgery and/or radiotherapy according to tumor size. For small tumors, the results are similar. For locally advanced tumors, the surgical approach is mutilating and requires a total (pharyngo)laryngectomy. Exclusive chemoradiotherapy has shown its interest at the cost of late sequelae. In order to reduce these effects and mutilation, induction chemotherapy with cisplatin, docetaxel and 5FU for organ preservation becomes the standard treatment but there are no solid studies comparing this approach with the exclusive chemoradiotherapy. And it is not possible to conclude as to the superiority of a scheme in terms of overall survival. When chemotherapy is chosen, the modalities of any potentiation of radiation have not been yet established.

[Quality assurance in head and neck medical oncology]

In medical oncology, how can we be sure that the right drug is being administered to the right patient at the right time? The implementation of quality assurance criteria is important in medical oncology, in order to ensure that the patient receives the best treatment safely. There is very little literature about quality assurance in medical oncology, as opposed to radiotherapy or cancer surgery. Quality assurance must cover the entire patient care process, from the diagnosis, to the therapeutic decision and drug distribution, including its selection, its preparation and its delivery to the patient (administration and dosage), and finally the potential side effects and their management. The dose-intensity respect is crucial, and its reduction can negatively affect overall survival rates, as shown in breast and testis cancers for example. In head and neck medical oncology, it is essential to respect the few well-standardized recommendations and the dose-intensity, in a population with numerous comorbidities. We will first review quality assurance criteria for the general medical oncology organization and then focus on head and neck medical oncology. We will then describe administration specificities of head and neck treatments (chemoradiation, radiation plus cetuximab, postoperative chemoradiation, induction and palliative chemotherapy) as well as their follow-up. Lastly, we will offer some recommendations to improve quality assurance in head and neck medical oncology.

Neoadjuvant TPF in locally advanced head and neck cancer can be followed by radiotherapy combined with cisplatin or cetuximab: a study of 157 patients

Neoadjuvant TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil), followed by radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy with weekly carboplatin, increases overall survival and organ preservation. We assessed whether TPF could be used in routine practice and whether radiotherapy potentiated with cisplatin or cetuximab was feasible and could increase survival. We retrospectively reviewed 157 patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma treated with TPF in four French institutions between May 2005 and March 2009. After induction, operable patients had undergone surgery and were irradiated, and potentiated in some cases with cetuximab or cisplatin. Most patients (79%) had been treated with organ preservation strategies. The two most common sites were the hypopharynx (34%) and the oropharynx (30%). The response rate to TPF was 84%, including 26% with a complete response. Radiotherapy had been provided to 144 (92%) patients (of whom 17 had received radiotherapy alone, 46 had received q3w cisplatin, 30 had received q1w cisplatin, and 37 had received cetuximab). Potentiation had been achieved as planned in 59, 63, and 62% of patients treated with q3w cisplatin, q1w cisplatin, and cetuximab, respectively. After a median follow-up of 39.9 months, the median overall survival was 43 months. No significant difference was observed in progression-free survival or overall survival according to the type of potentiation. This study confirms the efficacy and tolerability of TPF induction, followed by chemoradiation, with outcomes similar to those for patients irradiated without induction. The best potentiation of radiotherapy after induction has not yet been determined.

Treatment of older patients with head and neck cancer: a review

The incidence of head and neck cancer (HNC) in the elderly is increasing. The treatment of HNC often includes multimodality therapy that can be quite morbid. Older patients (herein, defined as ≥65 years) with HNC often have significant comorbidity and impaired functional status that may hinder their ability to receive and tolerate combined modality therapy. They have often been excluded from clinical trials that have defined standards of care. Therefore, tailoring cancer therapy for older patients with HNC can be quite challenging. In this paper, we performed a comprehensive literature review to better understand and discuss issues related to therapeutic recommendations that are particular to patients 65 years and older. Evidence suggests that older patients have similar survival outcomes compared with their younger peers; however, they may experience worse toxicity, especially with treatment intensification. Similarly, older patients may require more supportive care throughout the treatment process. Future studies incorporating geriatric tools for predictive and interventional purposes will potentially allow for improved patient selection and tolerance to intensive treatment.

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

BACKGROUND

Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are frequently described as part of a group of oral cancers or head and neck cancer. 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, notably impaired ability to eat, drink and talk. 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.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer results in improved survival, disease free survival, progression free survival, locoregional control and reduced recurrence of disease. To determine which regimen and time of administration (induction, concomitant or adjuvant) is associated with better outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED were undertaken on 1st December 2010. Reference lists of recent reviews and included studies were also searched to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and which compared the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration, were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eighty-nine trials which met the inclusion criteria were assessed for risk of bias and data were extracted by two or more review authors. The primary outcome was total mortality. Trial authors were contacted for additional information or for clarification.

MAIN RESULTS

There is evidence of a small increase in overall survival associated with induction chemotherapy compared to locoregional treatment alone (25 trials), hazard ratio (HR) of mortality 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.00, P = 0.06). Post-surgery adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved overall survival compared to surgery ± radiotherapy alone (10 trials), HR of mortality 0.88 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, P = 0.03), and there is some evidence that this improvement may be greater with concomitant adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (4 trials), HR of mortality 0.84 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.98, P = 0.03). In patients with unresectable tumours, there is evidence that concomitant or alternating chemoradiotherapy is associated with improved survival compared to radiotherapy alone (26 trials), HR of mortality 0.78 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.83, P < 0.00001). These findings are confirmed by sensitivity analyses based on studies assessed at low risk of bias. There is insufficient evidence to identify which agent(s) and/or regimen(s) are the most effective. The additional toxicity attributable to chemotherapy in the combined regimens remains unquantified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and surgery, is associated with improved overall survival in patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Induction chemotherapy may prolong survival by 8 to 20% and adjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy may prolong survival by up to 16%. In patients with unresectable tumours, concomitant or alternating chemoradiotherapy may prolong survival by 10 to 22%. There is insufficient evidence as to which agent or regimen is most effective and the additional toxicity associated with chemotherapy given in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery cannot be quantified.

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

BACKGROUND

Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are frequently described as part of a group of oral cancers or head and neck cancer. 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, notably impaired ability to eat, drink and talk. 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.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer results in improved survival, disease free survival, progression free survival, locoregional control and reduced recurrence of disease. To determine which regimen and time of administration (induction, concomitant or adjuvant) is associated with better outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED were undertaken on 28th July 2010. Reference lists of recent reviews and included studies were also searched to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and which compared the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration, were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials which met the inclusion criteria were assessed for risk of bias using six domains: sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, completeness of outcome data, selective reporting and other possible sources of bias. Data were extracted using a specially designed form and entered into the characteristics of included studies table and the analysis sections of the review. The proportion of participants in each trial with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are recorded in Additional Table 1.

MAIN RESULTS

There was no statistically significant improvement in overall survival associated with induction chemotherapy compared to locoregional treatment alone in 25 trials (hazard ratio (HR) of mortality 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.00). Post-surgery adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival compared to surgery +/- radiotherapy alone in 10 trials (HR of mortality 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99), and there was an additional benefit of adjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy compared to radiotherapy in 4 of these trials (HR of mortality 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98). Concomitant chemoradiotherapy resulted in improved survival compared to radiotherapy alone in patients whose tumours were considered unresectable in 25 trials (HR of mortality 0.79, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.84). However, the additional toxicity attributable to chemotherapy in the combined regimens remains unquantified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and surgery, is associated with improved overall survival in patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Induction chemotherapy is associated with a 9% increase in survival and adjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy is associated with a 16% increase in overall survival following surgery. In patients with unresectable tumours, concomitant chemoradiotherapy showed a 22% benefit in overall survival compared with radiotherapy alone.