Gap compensation during accelerated hypofractionated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer

Hypofractionated chemoradiation for head and cancer: Data from the PET NECK trial

There has been increased interest in hypofractionated accelerated chemoradiation for head and neck cancer during the recent first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospective data regarding this approach from randomised trials is lacking. In the PET NECK study, 564 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck receiving definitive chemoradiation were randomised to either planned neck dissection or PET CT scan guided surveillance. In this surgical trial, three radiotherapy fractionation schedules delivered over 7, 6 or 4 weeks were permitted with synchronous chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to determine efficacy and quality of life outcomes associated with the use of these schedules. Primary local control and overall survival in addition to quality of life measures at immediately post treatment and 6, 12 and 24 months post-treatment were compared between the three fractionation cohorts. In the 525 patients where fractionation data was available, 181 (34%), 288 (55%) and 56 (11%) patients received 68-70 Gy in 34-35 fractions (#), 60-66 Gy in 30# and 55 Gy in 20# respectively. At a minimum follow up of two years following treatment there was no significant difference between the three fractionation schemes in local control, overall survival or any quality of life measure. Despite the obvious limitations of this study, some data is provided to support the use of hypofractionated accelerated chemoradiation to avoid delays in cancer treatment and reduce hospital visits during the peak of a pandemic. Data from on-going randomised trials examining hypofractionated chemoradiation may be useful for selecting fractionation schedules during future pandemics.

Feasibility of Dose-escalated Hypofractionated Chemoradiation in Human Papilloma Virus-negative or Smoking-associated Oropharyngeal Cancer

AIMS

Oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) can be divided into favourable and poor prognostic groups by association with human papilloma virus (HPV) and smoking. This study prospectively investigated a dose-intensified schedule in poor/intermediate prognosis OPSCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with p16/HPV-negative or p16-positive N2b OPSCC with a greater than 10 pack-year smoking history were eligible. Patients were planned to receive 64 Gy in 25 fractions with cisplatin. The primary end point was absence of grade 3 mucositis at 3 months.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were recruited over 14 months. All patients completed a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. All patients completed full-dose radiotherapy within a median treatment time of 32 days (31-35). Grade 3 mucositis was absent in all patients at 3 months. There was one grade 4 toxicity event due to cisplatin (hypokalaemia). Complete response rates at 3 months were 100% and 93% for local disease and lymph nodes, respectively. One patient developed metastatic disease and subsequently died. Overall survival at 2 years was 93% (95% confidence interval 61-99%).

CONCLUSIONS

The schedule of 64 Gy in 25 fractions with concomitant chemotherapy is tolerable in patients with poor and intermediate prognosis OPSCC.

The use of MuGard™, Caphosol®and Episil®in patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

Introduction

Oral mucositis is common for patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Despite the significant detrimental sequelae associated, there is no consensus on the optimum mouth care regimen. This prospective audit aims to record mucositis and dysphagia toxicity and the level of analgesia prescribed when recent products: MuGard™, Caphosol®and Episil®are compared with our standard departmental mouth care regimen.

Methods

Patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced SCCHN at University Hospital Birmingham, UK were prospectively audited weekly for 8 consecutive weeks starting from week 1 of chemoradiotherapy from June 2009 until January 2011. Patients received either standard oral care regimen of aspirin, glycerin and sucralfate, or, MuGard™, Caphosol®or Episil®. Grade of mucositis, dysphagia and analgesia score were prospectively recorded using the common toxicity criteria v3·0.

Results

One hundred and four patients were included. There was no difference in the grade and duration of mucositis (p= 0·82), dysphagia (p= 0·99) or analgesia score (p= 0·61) for either MuGard™, Caphosol®or Episil®compared with standard oral care.

Conclusion

There is no evidence from this audit that Mugard™, Caphosol®or Episil®improves mucositis and dysphagia toxicity or the level of analgesia prescribed compared with our standard departmental mouth care regimen. Randomised trials comparing these approaches are required to detect any meaningful clinical benefit.