Results of definitive radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy for maxillary sinus carcinomas with neck lymph node metastasis

Role of primary tumor volume and metastatic lymph node volume in response to curative effect of definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown mixed results concerning the role of primary tumor volume (TV) and metastatic lymph node (NV) volume in response to the curative effect of definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the impact of TV and NV on the efficacy of radical radiotherapy in LAHNSCC patients, with the goal of guiding individualized therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with LAHNSCC who received radical radiation therapy and were reexamined within 6 months post-therapy from January 2012 to December 2021 were selected. The volumes of the primary tumors and metastatic lymph nodes were calculated by software and then were divided into a large TV group vs small TV group and a large NV group vs small NV group according to the relationship with the median. Additionally, patients who received concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or not were divided into the CCRT group and the radiotherapy (RT) group. Patients with lymph node metastasis were divided into node concurrent chemotherapy (N-CCRT) group and a node metastatic chemotherapy (N-RT) group according to whether they received concurrent chemotherapy or not. The volume shrinkage rate (VSR), objective response rate (ORR), local control rate (LCR) and overall survival (OS) were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

96 patients were included in the primary tumor volume group, and 73 patients were included in the metastatic lymph node group. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for objective remission (OR) endpoints, and a volume threshold was defined for TV and NV patients. The threshold primary tumor volume was 32.45 cm3, and the threshold metastatic lymph node volume was 6.05 cm3.The primary TV shrinkage rates of the small TV and the large TV groups were basically the same, P = 0.801. Similarly, the ORR and LCR were not significantly different between the small TV group and the large TV group (PORR = 0.118, PLCR = 0.315). Additionally, the TV shrinkage rate did not significantly differ between the CCRT group and the RT group, P = 0.133. Additionally, there was no significant difference in ORR or LCR in CCRT group (PORR = 0.057, PLCR = 0.088). However, the metastatic lymph node volume shrinkage rate in the small NV group was significantly greater than that in the large NV group (P = 0.001). The ORR and LCR of the small NV subgroup were significantly greater than those of the large NV subgroup (PORR = 0.002, PLCR = 0.037). Moreover, compared with that of the N-RT group, the NV shrinkage rate of the N-CCRT group was 84.10 ± s3.11%, and the shrinkage rate was 70.76 ± s5.77% (P = 0.047). For the ORR and LCR, the N-CCRT group and N-RT group were significantly different (PORR = 0.030, PLCR = 0.037). The median OS of the whole group was 26 months. However, neither TV/NV nor concurrent chemotherapy seemed to influence OS.

CONCLUSION

Primary tumor volume is not a prognostic factor for the response to curative effect radiotherapy in LAHNSCC patients. Nevertheless, metastatic lymph nodes are a prognostic factor for the response to curative effect radiotherapy in LAHNSCC patients. Patients with smaller lymph nodes have better local control.

A multi-institutional retrospective study of 340 cases of sinonasal malignant tumor

OBJECTIVE

Sinonasal malignant tumors (SNMT) are relatively rare among head and neck malignant tumors. Most are squamous cell carcinomas, and malignant melanomas, olfactory neuroblastomas, adenoid cystic carcinomas, sarcomas, and others also occur. The most common primary site of nasal sinus squamous cell carcinoma is the maxillary sinus. In recent years, a decrease in incidence of maxillary sinus squamous cell carcinoma (MSSCC) has been reported along with a decrease in the incidence of sinusitis. MSSCC is treated with a combination of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. Treatment decisions are made according to the progression of the disease, the patient's general condition, and the patient's own wishes. There are variations in treatment policies among facilities due to the specialty of staff and cooperation with other departments at each facility. We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective study to compare outcomes by treatment strategy.

METHODS

In this study, 340 patients with SNMT who were treated at 13 Hospitals (Head and Neck Oncology Group (Kyoto-HNOG) ) during the 12-year period from January 2006 to December 2017 were included. There were 220 patients with squamous cell carcinoma, 32 with malignant melanoma, 21 with olfactory neuroblastoma, and 67 with other malignancies. Of the squamous cell carcinomas, 164 were of maxillary sinus origin. One hundred and forty cases of MSSCC that were treated radically were included in the detailed statistical analysis.

RESULTS

There were 5 cases of cStage I, 9 cases of cStage II, 36 cases of cStage III, 74 cases of cStage IVa, and 16 cases of cStage IVb. There were 92 cases without clinical lymph node metastasis (cN(-)) and 48 cases with clinical lymph node metastasis(cN(+)). Primary tumors were treated mainly by surgery in 85 cases (Surg) and by radical radiation therapy (with or without chemotherapy) of 6-70 Gy in 55 cases(non-Surg). The 5-year overall/disease-free survival rate (OS/DFS) for MSSCC was 65.1%/51.6%. Old age, renal dysfunction, and clinical T progression were independent risk factors for OS, and renal dysfunction was an independent risk factor for DFS. In cN(-) patients, OS and DFS were significantly better in Surg group than in non-Surg group. In cN(+) patients, there was no significant difference in OS and DFS between Surg and non-Surg groups.

CONCLUSION

For patients with MSSCC without lymph node metastasis, aggressive surgery on the primary tumor contributes to improved prognosis.

Automated Non-coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning for Maxillary Sinus Carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIM

Dosimetric parameters in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT), and automated NC-VMAT (HyperArc, HA) were compared for patients with maxillary sinus carcinoma (MSC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty HA plans were generated to deliver 70.4, 64, and 46 Gy for planning target volumes with high (PTV1), intermediate (PTV2), and low risk (PTV3), respectively. The VMAT and NC-VMAT plans were retrospectively generated using the same optimized parameters as those used in the HA plans.

RESULTS

For PTV1, the three treatment plans provided comparable target coverages. For PTV2, the D_95%, D_99%, and D_min in the HA plans (64.7±1.2, 62.7±2.1 and 54.6±6.2 Gy, respectively) were significantly higher (p<0.05) than those in the VMAT plans (64.3±1.7, 61.9±2.4 and 52.9±6.4 Gy, respectively). The NC-VMAT and HA plans provided significantly higher (p<0.05) dosimetric parameters for PTV3 than those in the VMAT plans, and D_99% in the HA was significantly higher than that in the NC-VMAT plans (52.5±3.0 vs. 51.8±2.7 Gy, p<0.05). The doses to the brain and brainstem were lowest in the HA plans (p<0.05). Moreover, dosimetric parameters of the contralateral organs (lens, optic nerve, retina, and parotid) were lower in the HA plans than in the VMAT and NC-VMAT plans.

CONCLUSION

The HA plans provided the best target coverage and OAR sparing compared with VMAT and NC-VMAT plans for patients with MSC.