Long-Term Results of Conventional Radiotherapy versus Accelerated Hyperfractionated Radiotherapy versus Concomitant Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy in Locoregionally Advanced Carcinoma of the Oropharynx

Radiation Therapy for HPV-Positive Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

Human Papilloma Virus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is a distinct disease from other head and neck tumors. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on the critical decisions in its curative treatment, including both definitive and postoperative radiation therapy (RT) management.

METHODS

ASTRO convened a task force to address 5 key questions on the use of RT for management of HPV-associated OPSCC. These questions included indications for definitive and postoperative RT and chemoradiation; dose-fractionation regimens and treatment volumes; preferred RT techniques and normal tissue considerations; and posttreatment management decisions. The task force did not address indications for primary surgery versus RT. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength.

RESULTS

Concurrent cisplatin is recommended for patients receiving definitive RT with T3-4 disease and/or 1 node >3 cm, or multiple nodes. For similar patients who are ineligible for cisplatin, concurrent cetuximab, carboplatin/5-fluorouracil, or taxane-based systemic therapy are conditionally recommended. In the postoperative setting, RT with concurrent cisplatin (either schedule) is recommended for positive surgical margins or extranodal extension. Postoperative RT alone is recommended for pT3-4 disease, >2 nodes, or a single node >3 cm. Observation is conditionally recommended for pT1-2 disease and a single node ≤3 cm without other risk factors. For patients treated with definitive RT with concurrent systemic therapy, 7000 cGy in 33 to 35 fractions is recommended, and for patients receiving postoperative RT without positive surgical margins and extranodal extension, 5600 to 6000 cGy is recommended. For all patients receiving RT, intensity modulated RT over 3-dimensional techniques with reduction in dose to critical organs at risk (including salivary and swallowing structures) is recommended. Reassessment with positron emission tomography-computed tomography is recommended approximately 3 months after definitive RT/chemoradiation, and neck dissection is recommended for convincing evidence of residual disease; for equivocal positron emission tomography-computed tomography findings, either neck dissection or repeat imaging is recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

The role and practice of RT continues to evolve for HPV-associated OPSCC, and these guidelines inform best clinical practice based on the available evidence.

Osteoradionecrosis Rates After Head and Neck Radiation Therapy: Beyond the Numbers

PURPOSE

Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) is a severe late complication of head and neck radiation therapy shown to have profound negative effect on the quality of life of cancer survivors. Over the past few decades, improvements in radiation delivery techniques have resulted in a decrease in the incidence of ORN. However, even with modern radiation therapy techniques, ORN remains an important clinical concern. In recent literature, there is a wide range of reported ORN rates from 0% to as high as 20%. With such a high level of variability in the reported incidence of ORN, oncologists often encounter difficulties estimating the risk of this serious radiation therapy toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In this review, the authors present a summary of the factors that contribute to the high level of variability in the reported incidence of ORN.

RESULTS

Variable definition, variable grading, and heterogeneity of both study inclusion criteria and treatment parameters can each significantly influence the reporting of ORN rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Given numerous factors can affect the reported incidence of ORN, a thorough understanding of the clinical context behind the reported ORN rates is needed to comprehend the true risk of this important radiation therapy toxicity.

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.

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.

Accelerated Hyperfractionated Radiotherapy versus Conventional Fractionation Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

The benefits of accelerated hyperfractionated radiotherapy (HART) and conventional fractionation radiotherapy (CFRT) in the treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC) remain controversial. In this study, we analyzed the therapeutic effects of these two treatment regimens to explore whether HART can improve the overall survival (OS) rate and locoregional control (LRC) rate in patients with HNC.

Methods

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for eligible studies. The OS rate and LRC rate were considered as the efficacy outcomes. I² was used to test the heterogeneity among studies with a cutoff value of 50%. Potential publication bias was assessed by funnel plots and Egger's test. We also performed a sensitivity analysis to assess the stability of the results. In this meta-analysis, all analyses were performed using R 3.5.3 software.

Results

Twelve qualified articles including a total of 2,935 patients were identified. HART had a significant beneficial effect on OS rate (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65–0.98). Compared with CFRT, HART demonstrated a significantly higher LRC rate (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.71–0.96).

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis showed that HART can significantly improve OS and LRC compared with CFRT in patients with HNC.

The addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy did not reduce the rate of distant metastases in low-risk HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer in a real-world setting

Background

Distant metastases (DM) are a leading cause of death for patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPSCC). The objective of this study was to compare the rates of DM after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and radiotherapy alone (RT) in patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)‐positive and HPV‐negative OPSCC.

Method

In a retrospective population‐based study of 525 patients across Ontario, Canada, in 1998/99/03/04, we compared treatment effectiveness using cumulative incidence function curves and cause‐specific Cox regression models.

Results

Sixty of 525 patients developed DM. There was no difference in rates (overall 10%‐15%) between HPV‐positive and HPV‐negative patients or between CRT‐ and RT‐treated patients. CRT reduced the risk of DM for the 15% of all HPV‐positive patients with higher risk (T4 and/or N3) and not for HPV‐negative patients (hazard ratio, 1.82 [0.65‐5.07]).

Conclusion

The addition of platin‐based chemotherapy to conventional RT did not decrease the rates of DM in the majority of patients with HPV‐positive or in HPV‐negative OPSSC.

Pattern of and survival following loco-regional and distant recurrence in patients with HPV+ and HPV- oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based study

OBJECTIVES

The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV) positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is increasing. Currently, data is sparse on the pattern and timing of recurrence. This long-term study concerning both HPV- and p16-status aimed to report predictive factors, pattern, timing of loco-regional recurrence (LRR) and distant recurrence (DR), and survival following recurrence in patients diagnosed with OPSCC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We included patients diagnosed with OPSCC from 2000 to 2014 in Eastern Denmark, who were treated with curative intent. Tumors were defined as HPV-positive when they were both HPV-DNA and p16-positive. Time-to-failure and -death were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate predictors of failure.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 1244 consecutive patients with OPSCC of which 288 patients (23%) experienced recurrence. Of these patients, the majority (n = 197/1244; 16%) experienced LRR and the remaining (n = 91/1244; 7%) DR. Significantly more HPV-negative patients experienced recurrence (n = 170/486; 35%) compared to HPV-positive patient (n = 112/726; 15%). DR occurred for both groups predominantly to the lung (n = 63/91; 69.2%) followed by the liver and bone. Factors influencing risk of LRR included gender, T-classification, and HPV-status. The same variables influenced risk of DR in addition to the UICC-8 classification, N-classification, pack years of smoking, and performance status. HPV-status was the strongest risk factor for LRR and DR.

CONCLUSION

LRR and DR occur significantly less often in HPV-positive patients compared with HPV-negative patients. HPV-status is an independent and strong predictor of recurrence. DR most commonly occurs to the lungs, irrespective of HPV-status.

Locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of the currently available treatment options

BACKGROUND

There are still many unresolved questions in the management of locally advanced Head and Neck Cancer (HNC). Many chemotherapeutic drugs and radiotherapy fractionation schemes are available and not all have been evaluated in head-to-head clinical trials. This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis aims to compare the available treatment strategies and chemotherapeutic options for locally advanced HNC.

METHODS

We performed a search on bibliography databases, trials registries and meetings proceedings for published and unpublished randomized trials from January 1st 2000 to December 1st 2017. Trials had to compare systemic interventions and radiotherapy (RT) approaches for locally advanced, non-metastatic HNC. Trials recruiting patients whose surgery was the first treatment option, sample size less than 20 per arm or that did not use randomization for treatment allocation were excluded from the analysis. Summary estimates on Overall survival (OS), Progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity outcomes (grade 3-4 mucositis and neutropenia) were extracted from the included studies on a predefined database sheet. Bias was assessed through the Chocrane risk of bias assessment tool. We performed a set of pair-wise meta-analyses using a random effect model. We also performed a random effect network meta-analysis under a Bayesian framework.

FINDINGS

From the 57 included trials, including 15,723 patients, was possible to conduct analysis on 26 treatments for OS, 22 treatments for PFS and 10 treatments for toxicity. In terms of OS Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with cisplatin (HR 0.70, 95% CrI [credible interval] 0.62-0.78) and cetuximab on top of CCRT (HR 0.7, 95% CrI 0.5-0.97) are clearly superior to conventional RT alone. Induction chemotherapy (IC) with cisplatin and fluorouracil (HR 0.74, 95% CrI 0.52-0.95), IC with docetaxel, cisplatin, fluorouracil (HR 0.55, 95% CrI 0.54-0.89) and IC with paclitaxel, cisplatin, fluorouracil (HR 0.55, 95% CrI 0.34-0.89) before CCRT are all superior to conventional RT. CCRT with cisplatin is also superior to altered fractionation RT (HR 0.74, 95% CrI 0.64-0.84). Altered fractionation RT is not superior to conventional RT (HR 0.95, 95% CrI 0.85-1.06). Regarding PFS, CCRT with cisplatin (HR 0.72, 95% CrI 0.63-0.83), cisplatin and fluorouracil (HR 0.67, 95% CrI 0.5-0.88), carboplatin (HR 0.63, 95% CrI 0.46-0.87), carboplatin and fluorouracil (HR 0.75, 95% CrI 0.56-1), IC with cisplatin and fluorouracil (HR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.45-0.78), IC with docetaxel, cisplatin and fluorouracil (HR 0.53, 95% CrI 0.41-0.68) and IC with paclitaxel, cisplatin and fluorouracil (HR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.35-0.99) are superior to conventional RT and altered fractionation RT. IC with docetaxel, cisplatin and fluorouracil shows a significant superiority against CCRT with cisplatin (HR 0.73 95% CrI 0.58-0.92). Altered fractionation RT is not superior to conventional RT (HR 0.91, 95% CrI 0.81-1.02). Altered fractionation increases the risk of developing grade 3-4 mucositis compared to conventional RT (OR 3.74 95% 1.64-8.67) INTERPRETATION: CCRT with cisplatin remains the gold standard of treatment. Taxane based IC regimens may have a impact on locally advanced disease. Altered fractionation RT is inferior to CCRT and also does not seem to be meaningfully better than conventionally fractionated RT alone. Its role in locally advanced disease should be reevaluated.

Did the addition of concurrent chemotherapy to conventional radiotherapy improve survival for patients with HPV+ve and HPV-ve Oropharynx cancer? A population-based study

BACKGROUND

In the absence of clear evidence on the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) over conventional radiotherapy (RT) for HPV+ve and for HPV-ve oropharyngeal cancer (OPC), this study compares the treatments and outcomes from pre-CRT years to post-CRT years.

METHODS

A population-based retrospective treatment-effectiveness study based on all patients with OPC treated in Ontario Canada in 1998, 1999, 2003 and 2004. Charts were reviewed, tissue samples were requested and tissue was tested for p16 or in situ hybridisation. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were compared by treatment era and by treatment type for all 1028 patients, for 865 treated for cure and for 610 with HPV status.

RESULTS

There was no improvement in OS comparing pre-CRT to post-CRT eras for the HPV+ve patients (P=0.147) or for the HPV-ve patients (P=0.362). There was no difference in OS comparing CRT to RT for the HPV+ve cohort (HR=0.948 (0.642-1.400)) or for the HPV-ve patients (HR=1.083 (0.68-1.727)).

CONCLUSIONS

In these 'real-world' patients what appeared to be improvements in OS with CRT in clinical trials were confounded by HPV status in Ontario. CRT did not improve outcomes for HPV+ve or for HPV-ve patients.

A network meta-analysis of the sequencing and types of systemic therapies with definitive radiotherapy in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN)☆

OBJECTIVES

The current standard therapy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN) is platinum-based chemotherapy plus concurrent radiotherapy (CRT), but several systemic therapies have been evaluated. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) with random effects to enable direct and indirect comparisons of all existing treatment modalities for LASCCHN simultaneously.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, ASCO abstracts, ASTRO abstracts and the Cochrane Central of Registered Trials using Cochrane methodology to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to June 2016. Only abstracts that involved the same definitive radiotherapy in the arms for the RCT were included.

RESULTS

Sixty-five RCTs involving 13,574 patients and 16 different treatment strategies were identified. Chemotherapy plus concurrent radiation (CRT) was superior to RT with a HR of 0.74 (95%CR 0.69-0.79) for OS in the NMA. Only 3 trials compared RT alone to concurrent therapy with an EGFR antibody (ERT), demonstrating a superior OS (HR 0.75, 95% CR 0.60-0.94), but this difference was not statistically significant when interpreted in a NMA (HR 0.84, 95%CR 0.65-1.08). ERT was not superior to CRT (HR 1.19, 95%CR 0.93-1.54), and the addition of neo-adjuvant taxane-based chemotherapy to CRT was not beneficial (HR 0.86, 95% CR 0.70-1.07).

CONCLUSION

The addition of either adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy to the CRT backbone does not confer an OS benefit in the treatment of LASCCHN. Similarly, ERT does not confer an OS benefit for patients who are eligible for CRT.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Conventionally Fractionated Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy versus Altered Fractionation Radiotherapy Alone in the Definitive Management of Locoregionally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

AIMS

Treatment intensification either by using concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or altered fractionation radiotherapy (AFRT) improves outcomes of locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). The superiority of one approach over the other, however, remains to be firmly established. The aim of the present study was to compare outcomes of CCRT versus AFRT in the definitive non-surgical management of locoregionally advanced HNSCC for evidence-based decision making.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search of Medline via PubMed was conducted with no language, year, or publication status restrictions. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) were also searched electronically. Only randomised controlled trials assigning HNSCC patients randomly to conventionally fractionated CCRT or AFRT alone were included. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers and pooled using the Cochrane methodology for meta-analysis and expressed as a hazard ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Overall survival was the primary outcome of interest, whereas disease-free survival, locoregional control and toxicity were secondary end points.

RESULTS

Five randomised controlled trials (involving 1117 patients and 627 deaths) directly comparing conventionally fractionated CCRT with AFRT alone were included. The risk of bias in included studies was low for efficacy outcomes, but high for toxicity outcomes. The overall pooled hazard ratio of death was 0.73 (95% confidence interval = 0.62-0.86), which significantly favoured conventionally fractionated CCRT over AFRT alone (P < 0.0001). Similarly, disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval = 0.68-0.92; P = 0.002) and locoregional control (hazard ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.59-0.84; P < 0.0001) were significantly improved with CCRT. There were no significant differences in the incidence of severe acute toxicity (dermatitis and mucositis) between the two approaches of treatment intensification. Late xerostomia was significantly increased with CCRT. Significant haematological toxicity and nephrotoxicity were seen exclusively with chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

There is moderate quality evidence that conventionally fractionated CCRT improves survival outcomes compared with AFRT alone in the definitive radiotherapeutic management of locoregionally advanced HNSCC. No form of acceleration can potentially compensate fully for the lack of concurrent chemotherapy.

Impact of the addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer in 2003-2004: Population-based study from the Province of Ontario, Canada

BACKGROUND

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) became the standard of care for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancers based on clinical trials but its effectiveness at the community level is not reported.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based comparative effectiveness study of all 571 patients with oropharyngeal cancer in Ontario Canada (2003-2004) that describes the patients and the treatments and compares concurrent CRT to radiotherapy (RT) alone.

RESULTS

When comparing the outcomes (CRT vs RT) for all patients or patients eligible for either treatment, for patients of centers with the "higher use" of CRT to patients of the 'lower use' centers and comparing all centers, we found no overall or disease-specific advantage to CRT over RT alone. There was also no difference in recurrence-free survival, pattern of recurrences, or distant control.

CONCLUSION

In Ontario (2003-2004), in daily clinical practice, the addition of concurrent CRT to RT had little impact on survival in patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma.

Function and organ preservation in adult cancers of the head and neck

Treatment for primary head and neck cancer has evolved from the use of radical approaches to therapies preserving important functions. Essential to this concept is the maintenance of therapeutic efficacy. The advances of organ-sparing surgery, improved radiation techniques and fractionation, and the addition of chemotherapy and targeted systemic agents, have added to the number of patients who undergo organ-preservation therapy. Crucial functions that can be spared include speech, swallowing, vision, salivation and cosmesis. This paper examines advances in therapy that allow the preservation of these important functions, scenarios where organ and function preservation is indicated, given current technology and agents, and where there might be future improvements.

Concurrent radiochemotherapy in locally-regionally advanced oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: analysis of treatment results and prognostic factors

BACKGROUND

Concurrent radiochemotherapy is a recommended treatment option for patients with locally advanced squamous cell head and neck carcinomas with recent data showing the most significant absolute overall and event-free survival benefit achieved in patients with oropharyngeal tumours. The aim of this study was to analyse the results of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy given with concomitant weekly cisplatin in patients with advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma and to identify prognostic factors influencing outcomes of this patients category.

METHODS

Sixty-five patients with stage III or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx who underwent concurrent radiochemotherapy between January 2005 and December 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received radiotherapy to 70 Gy/35 fractions/2 Gy per fraction/5 fractions per week. Concurrent chemotherapy consisted of weekly cisplatin (30 mg/m(2)) started at the first day of radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Median age was 57 years (range, 36 to 69 years) and 59 (90.8%) patients were male. Complete composite response was achieved in 47 patients (72.3%). Local and/or regional recurrence was the most frequent treatment failure present in 19 out of 25 patients (76.0%). At a median follow-up of 14 months (range, 5 to 72 months), 2-year local relapse-free, regional relapse-free, locoregional relapse-free, disease-free, and overall survival rates were 48.8%, 57.8%, 41.7%, 33.2% and 49.7%, respectively.On multivariate analysis the only significant factor for inferior regional relapse-free survival was the advanced N stage (p = 0.048). Higher overall stage was independent prognostic factor for poorer local relapse-free survival, locoregional relapse-free survival and disease-free survival (p = 0.022, p = 0.003 and p = 0.003, respectively). Pre-treatment haemoglobin concentration was an independent prognostic factor for local relapse-free survival, regional relapse-free survival, locoregional relapse-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival (p = 0.002, p = 0.021, p = 0.001, p = 0.002 and p = 0.002, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Poor treatments results of this study suggested that introduction of intensity-modulated radiotherapy, use of induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent radiochemotherapy, accelerated radiotherapy regimens, and molecular targeted therapies could positively influence treatment outcomes. The incorporation of reversal of anaemia should be also expected to provide further improvement in locoregional control and survival in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx.

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: radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

The management of advanced oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers is problematic and has traditionally relied on surgery and radiotherapy, both of which are associated with substantial adverse effects. Radiotherapy has been in use since the 1950s and has traditionally been given as single daily doses. This method of dividing up the total dose, or fractionation, has been modified over the years and a variety of approaches have been developed with the aim of improving survival whilst maintaining acceptable toxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which radiotherapy regimens for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers result in increased overall survival, disease free survival, progression free survival and locoregional control.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 28 July 2010), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 28 July 2010) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 28 July 2010). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours of the oral cavity or oropharynx, and which compared two or more radiotherapy regimens, radiotherapy versus other treatment modality, or the addition of radiotherapy to other treatment modalities.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias was undertaken independently by two or more authors. Study authors were contacted for additional information as required. Adverse events data were collected from published trials.

MAIN RESULTS

30 trials involving 6535 participants were included. Seventeen trials compared some form of altered fractionation (hyperfractionation/accelerated) radiotherapy with conventional radiotherapy; three trials compared different altered fractionation regimens; one trial compared timing of radiotherapy, five trials evaluated neutron therapy and four trials evaluated the addition of pre-operative radiotherapy. Pooling trials of any altered fractionation radiotherapy compared to a conventional schedule showed a statistically significant reduction in total mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.98). In addition, a statistically significant difference in favour of the altered fractionation was shown for the outcome of locoregional control (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.89). No statistically significant difference was shown for disease free survival.No statistically significant difference was shown for any other comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Altered fractionation radiotherapy is associated with an improvement in overall survival and locoregional control in patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. More accurate methods of reporting adverse events are needed in order to truly assess the clinical performance of different radiotherapy regimens.

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.

Human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer: a new clinical entity

The incidence of oropharyngeal cancers is rising worldwide in both nonsmokers and nondrinkers. Epidemiology studies suggest a strong association between human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 infection, changing sexual behavior and cancer development. Despite initial presentation with locally advanced disease and poorly differentiated histology, HPV-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma is associated with a good prognosis because its response to chemotherapy and radiation. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of oropharyngeal cancer in young people to avoid unnecessary delay in diagnosis and treatment. A history of oral sex should be elicited in young patients with enlarged neck nodes and/or tonsillar masses.

A systematic review of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by cancer therapies: prevalence, severity and impact on quality of life

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to assess the literature for prevalence, severity, and impact on quality of life of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by cancer therapies.

METHODS

The electronic databases of MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE were searched for articles published in English since the 1989 NIH Development Consensus Conference on the Oral Complications of Cancer Therapies until 2008 inclusive. Two independent reviewers extracted information regarding study design, study population, interventions, outcome measures, results and conclusions for each article.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 184 articles covering salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by conventional, 3D conformal radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients, cancer chemotherapy, total body irradiation/hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, radioactive iodine treatment, and immunotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia are induced by radiotherapy in the head and neck region depending on the cumulative radiation dose to the gland tissue. Treatment focus should be on optimized/new approaches to further reduce the dose to the parotids, and particularly submandibular and minor salivary glands, as these glands are major contributors to moistening of oral tissues. Other cancer treatments also induce salivary gland hypofunction, although to a lesser severity, and in the case of chemotherapy and immunotherapy, the adverse effect is temporary. Fields of sparse literature included pediatric cancer populations, cancer chemotherapy, radioactive iodine treatment, total body irradiation/hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and immunotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous amifostine in minimizing radiation-induced toxicities in patients receiving combined-modality treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

PURPOSE

To report long-term data from a prospective trial of subcutaneous (s.c.) amifostine in patients who received chemoradiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients >or=18 years of age with previously untreated Stage III/IV SCCHN received fractionated radiotherapy, 1.8-2.0 Gy/day, 5 days per week, to a total dose of 70-72 Gy, plus weekly paclitaxel (40 mg/m2) and carboplatin (100 mg/m2) administered intravenously (i.v.) for 6 weeks. All patients received 500 mg s.c. amifostine 30-60 min before radiotherapy with antihistamine and antiemetic prophylaxis.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were evaluable (median age, 55 years). The incidence of Grade 2 xerostomia was 42% and 29% at 12 and 18 months, respectively; there were no reports of Grade >or=3 xerostomia. Grade >or=3 mucositis occurred in 30% of patients, with median time to resolution of 12.5 weeks (range, 5-17 weeks). Survival estimates at 1 and 2 years were 95% and 71%, respectively. All patients experienced Grade 2 weight loss; 7 patients (35%) experienced Grade <or=2 nausea/vomiting. There were no reports of Grade >/=3 amifostine-related adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Subcutaneous amifostine was well tolerated by patients receiving chemoradiotherapy for SCCHN, with lower rates of nausea/vomiting than reported in trials with i.v. amifostine. Xerostomia and mucositis rates were similar to those reported in trials with i.v. amifostine.