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searched 4 bibliographic databases up to 15 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.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.

The Statistical Evaluation of Treatment and Outcomes in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Clinical Trials

The purpose of this article is two-fold: to help statisticians confronted with the design, implementation and analysis of clinical trials and new to the field of head and neck cancer; but also to sensitize research physicians with the role, the tasks and the challenges faced by the medical statisticians. These two purposes altogether will hopefully encourage and enable fluid communication between the research physician and the medical statistician and the understanding of each other's field and concerns. In particular, the methodological challenges resulting from the heterogeneity of the head and neck cancer, the complexity of the treatments and the associated comorbidities are presented with examples borrowed from medical literature and from the practical experience of the authors in this field.

Locally advanced head and neck cancer

Treatment of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas requires a multidisciplinary approach to be able to offer patients definitive therapy while aiming to preserve organ function and minimize acute and long-term toxicities. Advances in surgical techniques will be reviewed for both primary sites and the neck and also in the salvage settings. Recent data on concurrent versus sequential chemoradiotherapy in these patients will be reviewed, with emphasis on identification of appropriate patients for sequential chemoradiotherapy. Finally, advances in modern radiotherapy modalities that have resulted in improved dosimetry and quality of life following treatment will be reviewed.

The current role of systemic chemotherapy in the primary treatment of head and neck cancer

The treatment of patients with locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) is still evolving into the perfect combination of the different multidisciplinary approaches. Induction chemotherapy (ICT) prior to planned definitive local therapy is widely used in this patient population for over 30 years but it is still unclear how to incorporate ICT into multimodality treatment the best. It appears to have a role in selected clinical situations especially for those patients with high risk for distant metastasis. However, since ICT protocols in different studies varies a lot, a comparative and consistent statement of benefits is difficult. We show the recent developments including randomized trials comparing radiochemotherapy (RCT) and ICT followed by definitive RCT here. This review summarizes how ICT has developed over the years, provides critical remarks of recent developments, and discusses how clinical trials including ICT should be conducted in the future.

Efficacy and safety of early G-CSF administration in patients with head and neck cancer treated by docetaxel-cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (DCF protocol): a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Induction chemotherapy with docetaxel-cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) for locally advanced head and neck cancers (HNC) is associated with a high risk of severe neutropenia or febrile neutropenia (FN). We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of administering granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on day 3 (D3) during chemotherapy (early G-CSF stimulation) versus after the end of chemotherapy, as per current guidelines (i.e., after the end of 5-FU perfusion; D7), and its impact on patient outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients ≥19 years old, with advanced HNC who received DCF induction chemotherapy (D and P 75 mg per meter squared (mg/m(2)) on day 1 and 5-FU 750 mg/m(2)/day from D1 to D5), were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Data of 70 patients were analyzed from 01 January 2003 to 01 December 2010. Mean age was 56 years (range 45 to 77 years). Thirty-six patients (51.4 %) received pegfilgrastim on D7, and 28 (40 %) started G-CSF prophylaxis during chemotherapy; 12 (17.1 %) had daily filgrastim and 16 (22.9 %) pegfilgrastim on D3. Overall response rate (ORR) was 89.6 % (three early deaths due to infectious complications; 4.3 %). The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 72.8 %. FN rate was 14.3 % and chemotherapy delay was 12.9 %. In the D7 G-CSF arm, incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia (p = 0.023), FN (p = 0.029), and cycle delays (p = 0.006) was statistically higher than the "early" G-CSF arm. A decrease of OS was observed at 2 years (from 85.1 to 63.5 %) of chemotherapy discontinuation or FN (p = 0.0348).

DISCUSSION

Early administration of G-CSF is safe and seems to be more effective than D7. Future prospective trials are required to confirm our results.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (sequential approach) in the management of head and neck cancer

Concurrent chemoradiation is considered the standard-of-care for locally advanced head and neck cancer of the hypopharynx, oropharynx and larynx, as well as unresectable disease. This paradigm was challenged by the introduction of induction chemotherapy (IC), which demonstrated non-inferiority in regards of overall survival (OS), along with increased organ preservation, when compared to the surgery and radiotherapy. More recently, IC followed by concurrent chemoradiation, the so-called sequential approach was developed in an attempt to decrease metastatic spread and improve locoregional control (LRC) rates, with much controversy amongst experts. A careful evaluation by a multidisciplinary team is necessary to recognize which patients should be offered this therapeutic approach due to a significantly greater rate of toxicity. Herein, we analyze the most current available evidence regarding the use of sequential therapy versus concurrent chemoradiation. Different factors including toxicity profile, adherence and patient characteristics play a major role in choosing the most appropriate treatment regimen.

Concomitant chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy as definitive, first line treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. A retrospective single center analysis

PURPOSE

Despite the lack of evidence to support its implementation in the clinical practice, induction chemotherapy (IC) before chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is often used in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). We retrospectively examined the tolerability, feasibility, and clinical outcome of both concepts in a single center analysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 83 patients were treated between 2007 and 2010 with IC + CRT (n = 42) or CRT alone (n = 41). IC consisted of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (TPF), or cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF). All patients were scheduled to receive 2 cycles of PF during concurrent CRT. Adverse events were assessed according to the common toxicity criteria of adverse events (CTCAE v. 3.0). Associations were tested using the χ² test, and survival estimates were calculated according to Kaplan-Meier.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 30.35 months (range 2.66-61.25 months). At 2 years, the overall survival rate was significantly higher for primary CRT compared to IC + CRT group (74.8 % vs. 54 %, respectively; p = 0.041). Significantly more treatment-related overall grade 4 toxicities were documented in the IC + CRT group compared to the CRT group (42.9% vs. 9.8%; p = 0.001). Renal toxicity ≥ grade 2 occurred in 52.4 % vs. 7.3 % (p < 0.001), respectively. In all, 93 % of the patients with primary CRT compared to 71 % with IC + CRT received the planned full radiotherapy dose (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

This is, to our knowledge, the largest retrospective study to compare IC + CRT with primary CRT. IC showed high acute toxicity, compromised the feasibility of concurrent CRT, and was associated with reduced overall survival rates compared to primary CRT. The lack of clinical benefit in conjunction with the increased toxicity does not support implementation of IC.

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.

Taxane-cisplatin-fluorouracil as induction chemotherapy in locally advanced head and neck cancers: an individual patient data meta-analysis of the meta-analysis of chemotherapy in head and neck cancer group

PURPOSE Cisplatin plus fluorouracil (PF) induction chemotherapy has been compared with taxane (docetaxel or paclitaxel), cisplatin, and fluorouracil (Tax-PF) in randomized trials in locoregionally advanced head and neck cancers (LAHNCs). The aim of this meta-analysis was to study the efficacy and toxicity of Tax-PF and PF and identify differences in outcomes in subsets of patients. METHODS Five randomized trials representing 1,772 patients were identified. Updated individual patient data (IPD) were retrieved for all trials. The log-rank test, stratified by trial, was used for comparison. Interaction or trend tests were used to study the interaction between covariates and treatment. Results Median follow-up was 4.9 years. The hazard ratio (HR) of death was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89; P < .001; absolute benefit at 5 years: 7.4%) in favor of Tax-PF. Heterogeneity was significant (P = .08, I(2) = 51%) and related to one trial. There was no more heterogeneity after exclusion of this trial (P = .99, I(2) = 0%), and HR of death was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.63 to 0.83) in favor of Tax-PF. There was no interaction between treatment effect and the following patient covariates: age, sex, performance status, tumor stage, or site. Tax-PF was associated with significant reductions of progression, locoregional failure, and distant failure compared with PF, with HRs of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.87; P < .001), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.94; P = .007), and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.89; P = .009) respectively. CONCLUSION This IPD meta-analysis shows the superiority of Tax-PF over PF as induction chemotherapy. Its precise role in the management of LAHNC remains to be determined.

Induction chemotherapy for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer: past, present, future?

The treatment of patients with locoregionally advanced squamous cell cancer of the head and neck is still evolving. Induction chemotherapy (IC) is widely used in this patient population and it is unclear how to best incorporate IC into multimodality treatment. Recently, the results of two randomized clinical trials were presented (the PARADIGM and Docetaxel Based Chemotherapy Plus or Minus Induction Chemotherapy to Decrease Events in Head and Neck Cancer trials), which showed no demonstrable benefit of IC followed by concurrent chemoradiation over concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone. However, a lower rate of distant metastatic disease was noted, suggesting that patients who are at high risk for metastatic disease may benefit from IC. This review summarizes how IC has evolved over the years, provides an update of recent developments, and discusses how IC may develop in the future.

Combination of taxanes, cisplatin and fluorouracil as induction chemotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Some investigations have suggested that induction chemotherapy with a combination of taxanes, cisplatin and fluorouracil (TPF) is effective in locally advanced head and neck cancer. However, other trials have indicated that TPF does not improve outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of TPF with a cisplatin and fluorouracil (PF) regimen through a meta-analysis.

METHODS

Four randomized clinical trials were identified, which included 1,552 patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who underwent induction chemotherapy with either a TPF or PF protocol. The outcomes included the 3-year survival rate, overall response rate and different types of adverse events. Risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using RevMan 5.1 software.

RESULTS

The 3-year survival rate (51.0% vs. 42.4%; p = 0.002), 3-year progression-free survival rate (35.9% vs. 27.2%; p = 0.007) and overall response to chemotherapy (72.9% vs. 62.1%; p<0.00001) of the patients in the TPF group was statistically superior to those in the PF group. In terms of toxicities, the incidence of febrile neutropenia (7.0% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.001) and alopecia (10.8% vs. 1.1%; p<0.00001) was higher in the TPF group.

CONCLUSION

The TPF induction chemotherapy regimen leads to a significant survival advantage with acceptable toxicity rates for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer compared with the PF regimen.

Induction chemotherapy in head and neck cancer: a new paradigm

Five hundred and fifty thousand new head and neck cancer cases are diagnosed each year worldwide. They are mostly locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma with a poor prognosis in terms of locoregional and distant failure. A major challenge for patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma is to achieve a high cure rate while preserving functions. Treatment strategies are designed according to the disease stage, primary site, operable status, patient age, and performance status. Surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and more recently molecular-targeted therapies are part of these strategies, but their sequence remains to be defined. Over the last 30 years, induction chemotherapy has attained an important position in the management of patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma, particularly since the introduction of taxanes. The decision to deliver induction chemotherapy (and its intensification) must be considered in the light of other treatments aiming at better locoregional control (normofractioned radiotherapy, accelerated or hyperfractionated radiotherapy, addition of concurrent chemotherapy, or of targeted therapy) with or without adjuvant treatment. This review summarizes the rationale, these data, and perspectives on induction chemotherapy-based strategies.

Disease control and functional outcome in three modern combined organ preserving regimens for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN)

Purpose

To report our experience on disease control and functional outcome using three modern combined-modality approaches for definitive radiochemotherapy of locally advanced SCCHN with modern radiotherapy techniques: radiochemotherapy (RChT), radioimmunotherapy (RIT) with cetuximab, or induction chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-FU (TPF) combined with either RChT or RIT.

Methods

Toxicity and outcome was retrospectively analysed in patients receiving definitive RChT, RIT, or induction chemotherapy followed by RChT or RIT between 2006 and 2009. Outcome was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analyses, toxicity was analysed according to CTCAE v 3.0.

Results

Thirty-eight patients were treated with RChT, 38 patients with RIT, 16 patients received TPF followed by either RChT or RIT. Radiotherapy was mostly applied as IMRT (68%). Long-term toxicity was low, only one case of grad III dysphagia requiring oesophageal dilatation, no case of either xerostomia ≥ grade II or cervical plexopathy were observed. Median overall survival (OS) was 25.7 months (RChT) and 27.7 months (RIT), median locoregional progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached yet. Subgroup analysis showed no significant differences between TPF, RChT, and RIT despite higher age and co-morbidities in the RIT group. Results suggested improved OS, distant and overall PFS for the TPF regimen.

Conclusion

Late radiation effects in our cohort are rare. No significant differences in outcome between RChT and RIT were observed. Adding TPF suggests improved progression-free and overall survival, impact of TPF on locoregional PFS was marginal, therefore radiotherapeutic options for intensification of local treatment should be explored.

[Induction chemotherapy for head and neck epidermoid carcinomas]

The standard treatment for head and neck inoperable squamous cell carcinoma is an association of radiotherapy and platinum. However, only one patient out of three remains alive five years after diagnosis. The interest in induction chemotherapy was renewed by the introduction of taxanes combined with cisplatinum and 5-fluoro-uracile. The triple association taxane-cisplatinum-5-fluoro-uracile yielded improved survival when compared to cisplatinum-5-fluoro-uracile. Wider use of taxane-cisplatinum-5-fluoro-uracile is limited by its toxicity and the lack of randomized comparison with a concomitant chemoradiotherapy scheme including optimal doses of platinum. Until the results of new phase III trials are published, the choice between induction chemotherapy followed by concomitant chemoradiotherapy or concomitant chemoradiotherapy alone has to be made on an individualized basis, taking into account the patient's medical condition, the ability of the medical team to deal with intensive treatment regimens, and the clinical/pathological characteristics of the tumour.

Induction chemotherapy for head and neck cancer: recent data

The addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) patients improves survival. Meta-analyses of randomized trials have indicated that the benefit of this approach is associated with the timing of chemotherapy administration. It has been demonstrated that the greatest survival benefit over locoregional treatment alone is seen with the concurrent administration of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. However, sequential chemotherapy administration, in the form of induction chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy, has been successful as a strategy for organ function preservation in patients with potentially resectable SCCHN. In addition, a meta-analysis of trials using platinum and 5-fluorouracil (PF)-containing induction regimens demonstrated a significant survival benefit for this approach over locoregional treatment alone in locally advanced disease. In recent years, the introduction of the taxanes into induction chemotherapy has provided physicians with more active regimens. The triplet combination induction regimen of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil has been shown to be more effective in prolonging survival than the doublet PF. Current trials are testing whether the addition of induction chemotherapy to standard concomitant chemoradiotherapy is superior to concomitant chemoradiotherapy alone.

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.

Usefulness of interim FDG-PET after induction chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck receiving sequential induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

Induction chemotherapy (ICT) has been used to select patients for organ preservation and determine subsequent treatments in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN). Still, the clinical outcomes of LASCCHN patients who showed response to ICT are heterogeneous. We evaluated the efficacy of interim 18-fluoro-2-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) after ICT in this specific subgroup of LASCCHN patients who achieved partial response (PR) after ICT to predict clinical outcomes after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty-one patients with LASCCHN who showed PR to ICT by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors before definitive CCRT were chosen in this retrospective analysis. FDG-PET was performed before and 2-4 weeks after ICT to assess the extent of disease at baseline and the metabolic response to ICT, respectively. We examined the correlation of the metabolic response by the percentage decrease of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) on the primary tumor or lymph node after ICT or a specific threshold of SUVmax on interim FDG-PET with clinical outcomes including complete response (CR) rate to CCRT, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A SUVmax of 4.8 on interim FDG-PET could predict clinical CR after CCRT (100% vs. 20%, p=0.001), PFS (median, not reached vs. 8.5 mo, p<0.001), and OS (median, not reached vs. 12.0 months, p=0.001) with a median follow-up of 20.3 months in surviving patients. A 65% decrease in SUVmax after ICT from baseline also could predict clinical CR after CCRT (100% vs. 33.3%, p=0.003), PFS (median, not reached vs. 8.9 months, p<0.001) and OS (median, not reached vs. 24.4 months, p=0.001) of the patients.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that interim FDG-PET after ICT might be a useful determinant to predict clinical outcomes in patients with LASCCHN receiving sequential ICT followed by CCRT.

Cetuximab in the management of locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer: expanding the treatment options?

The treatment of locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) has evolved in recent years as a consequence of a better understanding of the potential benefits associated with altered radiation fractionation regimens, concurrently administered chemotherapy and radiotherapy (chemoradiotherapy) and induction chemotherapy. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is a treatment option for technically resectable disease, where functional morbidity precludes the use of surgery. Induction chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy may also be used in this setting, and has been validated for larynx preservation. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is a standard treatment approach for medically fit patients with locoregionally advanced unresectable disease. However, the toxicity burden of additional chemotherapy in both the concurrent chemoradiotherapy and induction chemotherapy settings can have implications for treatment compliance and may impede the administration of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy to schedule. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted IgG1 monoclonal antibody, cetuximab (Erbitux), has shown significant clinical benefits in the treatment of both locoregionally advanced and recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN. A phase III study in locoregionally advanced disease demonstrated significant improvements in locoregional control and progression-free and overall survival with cetuximab plus radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone, and overall survival benefits were maintained at 5 years. The addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiotherapy has been shown to be feasible in phase II trials and is being investigated in phase III trials. Preliminary evidence suggests that cetuximab could be incorporated into induction management strategies. Taken together, these data support an important role for cetuximab in the treatment paradigm for locoregionally advanced SCCHN.

Induction chemotherapy in the management of head and neck cancer

The strategy of induction chemotherapy prior to planned definitive local therapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma has been studied for over 30 years, and appears to have a role in select clinical situations. Here we review landmark studies regarding induction chemotherapy, both in the pre-taxane era and in the current taxane era, and we address some of the unresolved questions regarding the role of induction chemotherapy in head and neck cancer.

Personalizing cancer care: updates on head and neck cancer

With an emphasis on personalizing cancer care, the American Society of Clinical Oncology 45th Annual Meeting was held from 29 May to 2 June in Orlando (FL, USA). Several abstracts were presented that will significantly impact the management of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck both currently and in the near future, especially with respect to patient selection for specific therapies, prognostic biomarkers and novel agents.

A non-randomized comparison of gemcitabine-based chemoradiation with or without induction chemotherapy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

Background

Concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (chemoradiation; CRT) is the standard treatment for locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA-SCCHN). CRT improves local control and overall survival (OS) when compared to radiotherapy (RT) alone. Induction chemotherapy (IC) reduces the risk of distant metastases (DM) and improves OS by 5% with the use of cisplatin/infusional 5 fluorouracil (PF) in meta-analysis. Adding a taxane to PF in the IC regimen confers a better outcome. Sequential treatment (ST) of IC followed by CRT is therefore under active investigation in multiple phase III trials.

Methods

We compared the outcome of two cohorts of patients (pts) with LA-SCCHN treated at our institution with CRT (n = 27) or ST (n = 31), respectively. CRT consisted of GEM 100 mg/m² weekly + conventional RT (70 Gy); ST consisted of the same CRT preceded by platinum-based IC.

Results

Response to IC: complete 8 (26%), partial 20 (65%), stable 1, progressive 1, not evaluable 1. Median follow up of the surviving pts: for CRT 73 months, for ST 51 months. Median time to distant metastasis (TDM) was for CRT 23.6 months, for ST not reached. Median OS was for CRT 20.2 months, for ST 40.2 months. Cox regression analysis, taking into account age, T and N stage and tumor site, showed a hazard ratio with ST of 1.190 for time to locoregional failure (p = 0.712), 0.162 for TDM (p = 0.002), and 0.441 for overall survival (OS) (p = 0.026).

Conclusion

TDM and OS were found significantly longer in the ST cohort without a reduced locoregional control. Notwithstanding the limitations of a non-randomized single-center comparison, the results are in line with very preliminary data of randomized comparisons suggesting an improved outcome with ST.