Follow-Up of Head and Neck Cancer Survivors: Tipping the Balance of Intensity

Algorithms of follow-up in patients with head and neck cancer in relation to primary location and advancement. Consensus of Polish ENT Society Board and Head Neck Experts

Summary

The algorithm of follow-up in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) has been prepared by a board of Polish Head Neck and Oncology Experts. The aim of this research is to focus on the specificity of HNC monitoring, to review the current trends in follow-up, and to adapt the evidence-based medicine international standards to the capabilities of the local healthcare service.

Materials and methods

The first methodological step was to categorize HNCs according to the estimated risk of failure after the adequate first-line treatment and according to the possibility of effective salvage treatment, resulting in improved overall survival. The final method used in this work was to prepare an authors' original monitoring algorithm for HNC groups with a high, moderate, and low risk of recurrence in combination with a high or low probability of using an effective salvage.

Results

Four categories were established: Ia. low risk of recurrence + effective organ preservation feasible; Ib. low risk of recurrence + effective salvage feasible; II. moderate risk of recurrence + effective salvage feasible; III. high risk of recurrence + effective salvage feasible; and IV. high risk of recurrence + no effective salvage feasible. Follow-up visit consisting of 1. ENT examination + neck ultrasound, 2. imaging HN tests, 3. chest imaging, 4. blood tests, and 5. rehabilitation (speech and swallowing) was scheduled with a very different frequency, at the proposed monthly intervals, tailored to the needs of the group. The number of visits for individual groups varies from 1 to 8 in the first 2 years and from 1 to 17 in the entire 5-year monitoring period. Group IV has not been included in regular follow-up, visits on own initiative of the patient if symptomatic, or supportive care needs, having in mind that third-line therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors are available.

Conclusion

Universal monitoring algorithm for HNC four groups with a high, moderate, and low risk of recurrence after the adequate treatment in combination with a high or low probability of using an effective salvage is an innovative approach to redeploying system resources and ensuring maximum benefit for patients with HNC.

An Intensive 18F-Fludeoxyglucose-Positron Emission Tomography With Computed Tomography-Based Strategy of Follow-Up in Patients Treated for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Who Are Clinically Asymptomatic

Importance

Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have a significant risk of locoregional recurrence within the first 2 years, with approximately two-thirds of patients experiencing such recurrence. While early recurrence detection may be associated with improved patient outcomes, the association of such detection with survival remains uncertain.

Objective

To investigate the association of an intensive posttreatment follow-up strategy using 18F-fludeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography with computed tomography (18FDG-PET/CT) with survival among patients with HNSCC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This case-control study was conducted among patients treated at 1 of 3 locations in Brest, France (University Hospital, Military Hospital, or Pasteur Clinic). The statistical analysis was conducted from January to June 2023. All adults with histologically proven HNSCC who were treated with curative intent between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2019, and achieved a complete response on imaging at 3 to 6 months were included. They had a minimum of 3 years of follow-up.

Exposures

Patients undergoing an intensive posttreatment follow-up strategy had 18FDG-PET/CT (PET/CT group) at months 12, 24, and 36, chosen at the discretion of ear, nose, and throat surgeons.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall survival (OS) at 3 years.

Results

Among 782 patients with HNSCC (642 males [82.1%]; median [IQR] age, 61 [56-68] years), 497 patients had 18FDG-PET/CT during follow-up and 285 patients had conventional follow-up (CFU group). Cox regression analysis showed an association between undergoing 18FDG-PET/CT and lower risk of death (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.88; P = .002) after adjustment for covariates (age, sex, comorbidities, primary location, stage, surgeon, year of treatment, and treatment). The mean (SD) 3-year OS was significantly better in the PET/CT vs CFU group (72.5% [2.0%] vs 64.3% [2.9%]; P = .002). Analysis based on American Joint Committee on Cancer stage showed significantly better mean (SD) 3-year OS for advanced stages III and IV in the PET/CT group (373 patients) vs CFU group (180 patients; 68.5% [2.4%] vs 55.4% [3.8%]; P < .001), while no significant difference was observed between patients with stage I or II HNSCC. Analysis based on primary tumor site revealed significantly longer mean (SD) 3-year OS for oropharyngeal tumor in the PET/CT group (176 patients) than the CFU group (100 patients; 69.9% [3.5%] vs 60.5% [5.0%]; P = .04).

Conclusions and relevance

This case-control study found that use of 18FDG-PET/CT in the standard annual CFU of HNSCC was associated with a 3-year survival benefit, with a larger benefit for patients with advanced initial tumor stage (III-IV) and oropharyngeal disease.

Evaluation of a remote monitoring app in head and neck cancer follow-up care

BACKGROUND

A remote monitoring app was developed for head and neck cancer (HNC) follow-up during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This mixed-methods study provides insight in the usability and patients' experiences with the app to develop recommendations for future use.

METHODS

Patients were invited to participate if they were treated for HNC, used the app at least once and were in clinical follow-up. A subset was selected for semi-structured interviews through purposive sampling considering gender and age. This study was conducted between September 2021-May 2022 at a Dutch university medical center.

RESULTS

135 of the 216 invited patients completed the questionnaire, resulting in a total mHealth usability score of 4.72 (± 1.13) out of 7. Thirteen semi-structured interviews revealed 12 barriers and 11 facilitators. Most of them occurred at the level of the app itself. For example, patients received no feedback when all their answers were normal. The app made patients feel more responsible over their follow-up, but could not fulfill the need for personal contact with the attending physician. Patients felt that the app could replace some of the outpatient follow-up visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Our app is user-friendly, makes patients feel more in control and remote monitoring can reduce the frequency of outpatient follow-up visits. The barriers that emerged must be resolved before the app can be used in regular HNC follow-up. Future studies should investigate the appropriate ratio of remote monitoring to outpatient follow-up visits and the cost-effectiveness of remote monitoring in oncology care on a larger scale.

A nationwide study on cancer recurrences, second primary tumours, distant metastases and survival after treatment for primary head and neck cancer in the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

There is no consensus on the optimal duration of post-treatment follow-up after head and neck cancer (HNC). To generate site-specific input for follow-up guidelines, this study describes the incidence and timing of manifestations of disease during five years of follow-up.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with HNC in the Netherlands in 2015 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The follow-up events local recurrence (LR), regional recurrence (RR), second primary tumour (SPT), distant metastasis (DM) and death were studied per follow-up-year. The cumulative incidence of these events was calculated using competing risk analyses, with LR, RR and SPT of the head and neck (SPHNC) as events and SPT outside the head-neck (SPOHN), DM and death as competing events. Analyses were performed for oral cavity-, oropharynx-, larynx- and hypopharynx squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and all HNC patients.

RESULTS

The 1-, 1.5-, and 2-year cumulative incidence of an event (LR, RR, SPHNC) were 10% (95%CI 8-13), 12% (95%CI 10-15), and 13% (95%CI 10-16) for oral cavity SCC; 6% (95%CI 4-9), 10% (95%CI 7-14), and 11% (95%CI 8-15) for oropharynx SCC; 7% (95%CI 5-10), 11% (95%CI 9-15), and 13% (95%CI 10-16) for larynx SCC and 11% (95%CI 6-19), 19% (95%CI 12-27), and 19% (95%CI 12-27) for hypopharynx SCC.

CONCLUSIONS

One year of follow-up for oral cavity SCC, and 1.5 years for oropharynx-, larynx-, and hypopharynx SCC suffices for the goal of detecting disease manifestations after treatment. More research into other aspects of follow-up care should be performed to determine the optimal follow-up regimen.

Surveillance of head neck cancer: Case for personalized and standardized surveillance

Although surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or combined treatment often elicits an initial satisfactory response, relapses are frequently observed within two years. Current surveillance methods, including clinical exams and imaging evaluations, have not unambiguously demonstrated a survival benefit, most probably due to a lack of sensitivity in detecting very early recurrence. Current guidelines advise post-treatment surveillance of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients should involve scheduled appointments with a variety of practitioners. The benefits of prolonged routine follow-up on survival have not been proven. Increasing numbers of HNC survivors raise the burden to provide efficient and effective care.

Individualised follow-up for head and neck cancer-design of a prospective cohort study to assess its feasibility

INTRODUCTION

It is a common practice for many cancer types to monitor patients after treatment to detect new disease manifestations early. For head and neck cancer (HNC), however, long-term routine follow-up is up for debate for several reasons. The benefits of prolonged routine follow-up on survival have not been proven. Also, cancer follow-up is putting increasing pressure on healthcare resources due to rising incidence and survival rates. Therefore, this study investigates a novel follow-up approach among HNC patients, giving them the opportunity to choose their own follow-up programme.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

HNC patients are offered a decision-aided choice between standardised or individualised follow-up after 1.5 years of uncomplicated guideline-prescribed follow-up. Standardised follow-up entails continuing the 5-year guideline-prescribed schedule. Individualised follow-up means the patient only attends the outpatient clinic on their own initiative in case of physical symptoms or supportive care needs. Patients are educated on self-examination and when a control visit is necessary. The primary outcome measure is the feasibility of offering patients this choice. Secondary outcome measures are quality of life, costs, productivity loss and detection of new disease.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We believe that it is essential to let patients determine their follow-up programme based on their own values and preferences. If this choice is feasible, it can be implemented and investigated in other HNC care centres.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05386225.

Exploring the views of patients' and their family about patient-initiated follow-up in head and neck cancer: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this work was to explore head and neck cancer (HNC) patients' and their family members' views on acceptability and feasibility of patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU), including concerns and anticipated benefits.

METHODS

Patients were recruited from UK HNC clinics, support groups and advocacy groups. They completed a survey (n = 144) and/or qualitative interview (n = 30), three with a family member. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, quantitative data using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Preference for follow-up care in HNC was complex and individual. Many patients thought PIFU could beneficially reallocate health care resources and encourage self-management. Patients' main concerns with PIFU were losing the reassurance of regular clinic appointments and addressing mental well-being needs within PIFU, possibly using peer support. Patients were concerned about their ability to detect recurrence due to lack of expertise and information. They emphasised the importance of a reliable, direct and easy urgent appointment service and of feeling supported and heard by clinicians. Patients believed family and friends need support.

CONCLUSION

PIFU may be feasible and acceptable for certain HNC patients, providing it addresses support for mental well-being, provides quick, reliable and direct clinician access and information on "red flag" symptoms, and ensures patients and their caregivers feel supported.

Evaluation of Optimal Assessment Schedules for Surveillance After Definitive Locoregional Treatment of Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study With Parametric Modeling of Event-Free Survival

Importance

In clinical practice, assessment schedules are often arbitrarily determined after definitive treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC), producing heterogeneous and inconsistent surveillance plans.

Objective

To establish an optimal assessment schedule for patients with definitively treated locally advanced HNC, stratified by the primary subsite and HPV status, using a parametric model of standardized event-free survival curves.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a retrospective study including 2 tertiary referral hospitals and a total of 673 patients with definitive locoregional treatment of locally advanced HNC (227 patients with nasopharyngeal cancer [NPC]; 237 patients with human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer [HPV+ OPC]; 47 patients with HPV-negative [HPV-] OPC; 65 patients with hypopharyngeal cancer [HPC]; and 97 patients with laryngeal cancer [LC]). Patients had received primary treatment in 2008 through 2019. The median (range) follow-up duration was 57.8 (6.4-158.1) months. Data analyses were performed from April to October 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Tumor recurrence and secondary malignant neoplasms. Event-free survival was defined as the period from the end of treatment to occurrence of any event. Event-free survival curves were estimated using a piecewise exponential model and divided into 3 phases of regular follow-up. A 5% event rate criterion determined optimal follow-up time point and interval.

Results

The median (range) age of the 673 patients at HNC diagnosis was 58 (15-83) years; 555 (82.5%) were men; race and ethnicity were not considered. The event rates of NPC, HPV+ OPC, HPV- OPC, HPC, and LC were 18.9% (43 of 227), 14.8% (35 of 237), 36.2% (17 of 47), 44.6% (29 of 65), and 30.9% (30 of 97), respectively. Parametric modeling demonstrated optimal follow-up intervals for HPC, LC, and NPC, respectively, every 2.1, 3.2, and 6.1 months; 3.7, 5.6, and 10.8 months; and 9.1, 13.8, and 26.5 months until 16.5, 16.5 to 25.0, and 25.0 to 99.0 months posttreatment (open follow-up thereafter). For HPV- OPC, assessment was recommended every 2.7, 4.8, and 11.8 months until 16.5, 16.5 to 25.0, and 25 to 99 months posttreatment, respectively. In contrast, HPV+ OPC optimal intervals were every 7.7, 13.7, and 33.7 months until 16.5, 16.5 to 25.0, and 25 to 99 months posttreatment, respectively. Five, 4, 12, 15, and 10 follow-up visits were recommended for NPC, HPV+ OPC, HPV- OPC, HPC, and LC, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

This retrospective cohort study using parametric modeling suggests that the HNC assessment schedules should be patient tailored and evidence based to consider primary subsites and HPV status. Given limited health care resources and rising detection rates and costs of HNC, the guidelines offered by these findings could benefit patients and health systems and aid in developing future consensus guidelines.

Long-Noncoding RNA MANCR is Associated With Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Malignant Development and Immune Infiltration

Recent studies have demonstrated an important role for mitotically associated long non-coding RNA (MANCR) in carcinogenesis and cancer progression, but its function has not been elucidated in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). In this study, we identified differentially expressed MANCR from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) databases across 24 cancer types and included 546 HNSCC patients. Furthermore, high expression of MANCR was verified in HNSCC cell lines and tissue by using real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) analysis. The Kaplan–Meier analysis showed a worse prognosis with higher levels of MANCR for HNSCC. The univariate Cox regression and multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed that MANCR was a high-risk factor in patients with HNSCC. Thereafter, we carried out the Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analyses. It was indicated that MANCR participates in axonogenesis and ECM-receptor interaction. Further enrichment analysis demonstrated that the expression of MANCR was positively correlated with the T gamma delta (tgd) cells, neutrophils, and Th1 cells, and negatively correlated with the infiltration of B cells, CD8 T cells, and T cells in HNSCC. In addition, in vitro experiments showed that knockdown of MANCR in HNSCC cells markedly inhibited cell proliferation, migration, and invasion. We find that MANCR was elevated in HNSCC and promoted the malignant progression of HNSCC. MANCR may serve as a potential biomarker in prognostic implications for HNSCC patients. The positive correlation between MANCR and immune infiltration cells may provide novel therapeutic targets and personalized immune-based cancer therapy for HNSCC.

Clinicians' Views of Patient-initiated Follow-up in Head and Neck Cancer: a Qualitative Study to Inform the PETNECK2 Trial

AIMS

Current follow-up for head and neck cancer (HNC) is ineffective, expensive and fails to address patients' needs. The PETNECK2 trial will compare a new model of patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU) with routine scheduled follow-up. This article reports UK clinicians' views about HNC follow-up and PIFU, to inform the trial design.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Online focus groups with surgeons (ear, nose and throat/maxillofacial), oncologists, clinical nurse specialists and allied health professionals. Clinicians were recruited from professional bodies, mailing lists and personal contacts. Focus groups explored views on current follow-up and acceptability of the proposed PIFU intervention and randomised controlled trial design (presented by the study co-chief investigator), preferences, margins of equipoise, potential organisational barriers and thoughts about the content and format of PIFU. Data were interpreted using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Eight focus groups with 34 clinicians were conducted. Clinicians highlighted already known limitations with HNC follow-up - lack of flexibility to address the wide-ranging needs of HNC patients, expense and lack of evidence - and agreed that follow-up needs to change. They were enthusiastic about the PETNECK2 trial to develop and evaluate PIFU but had concerns that PIFU may not suit disengaged patients and may aggravate patient anxiety/fear of recurrence and delay detection of recurrence. Anticipated issues with implementation included ensuring a reliable route back to clinic and workload burden on nurses and allied health professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians supported the evaluation of PIFU but voiced concerns about barriers to help-seeking. An emphasis on patient engagement, psychosocial issues, symptom reporting and reliable, quick routes back to clinic will be important. Certain patient groups may be less suited to PIFU, which will be evaluated in the trial. Early, meaningful, ongoing engagement with clinical teams and managers around the trial rationale and recruitment process will be important to discourage selective recruitment and address risk-averse behaviour and potential workload burden.

[Oncologic follow-up in head and neck cancer patients]

Despite medical treatment according to evidence-based guidelines, approximately 25-30% of all head and neck tumor patients suffer a disease relapse, depending on tumor stage and entity. The primary goal of systematic follow-up examinations is early detection and treatment of recurrent tumors or metachronous secondary tumors, but it also serves to rule out distant metastasis. Secondary goals are the diagnosis and management of treatment-associated side effects to optimize quality of life. Because of an especially high relapse risk in the first 2 years after treatment, close-knit clinical controls are recommended, e.g., quarterly. Later on, the clinical control interval can be extended to 6 months. Cross-sectional diagnostic imaging of the primary tumor region is performed annually and when screening for possible distant metastases, or upon clinical suspicion of recurrence. After 5 years without tumor recurrence, the structured clinical follow-up is usually completed.

Characterizing head and neck cancer survivors' discontinuation of survivorship care

BACKGROUND

Little is known about cancer survivors who discontinue survivorship care. The objective of this study was to characterize patients with head and neck cancer who discontinue survivorship care with their treating institution and identify factors associated with discontinuation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016, who received cancer-directed therapy at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (UIHC). Eligible patients achieved a cancer-free status after curative-intent treatment and made at least 1 visit 90+ days after treatment completion. The primary outcome was discontinuation of survivorship care, which was defined as a still living survivor who had not returned to a UIHC cancer clinic for twice the expected interval. Demographic and oncologic factors were examined to identify associations with discontinuation.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven of the 426 eligible patients (22.8%) discontinued survivorship care at UIHC during the study period. The mean time in follow-up for those who discontinued treatment was 15.4 months. Factors associated with discontinuation of care included an unmarried status (P = .036), a longer driving distance to the facility (P = .0031), and a single-modality cancer treatment (P < .0001). Rurality was not associated with discontinuation (24.3% vs 21.6% for urban residence; P = .52), nor was age, gender, or payor status.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results indicate that a sizeable percentage of head and neck cancer survivors discontinue care with their treating institution. Both demographic and oncologic factors were associated with discontinuation at the treating institution, and this points to potential clinical and care delivery interventions.

Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Head and neck cancers (HNC) require high level multidisciplinary care to achieve optimal outcomes. Reporting of quality indicators (QIs) has been instigated by some health services in an effort to improve quality of care. The aim of this study was to determine the quality of care provided to patients with HNC at a single institution by analysing compliance with QIs and to explore the feasibility and utility of collecting this data.

METHODS

This was a single institution retrospective chart review of all patients with squamous cell HNC at Townsville Hospital who were treated with curative intent between June 2011 and June 2019. Data was entered into a RedCap database and then exported to Stata V16 for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 537 patients were included in the overall study, with six patients who had a synchronous non-HNC and two patients who received previous radiotherapy (RT) to the head and neck region excluded from the outcome analysis. Overall, compliance with pre-treatment, treatment and post-treatment QIs was high, with the exception of smoking cessation support (66%), post-treatment dental review and time to post-operative RT (33% of patients within 6 weeks). The 5-year overall survival was 69.4% (CI; 64-73.2%). The cumulative incidence of locoregional relapse for the overall study cohort was 18% (CI; 14.8-21.4%).

CONCLUSION

Collecting and evaluating quality metrics is feasible and helps identify areas for improvement. Centres treating HNC patients should strive towards monitoring quality against benchmarks and demonstrate transparency in outcome data.

Less Is More? The Association between Survival and Follow-Up Protocol after Treatment in Oral Cavity Cancer Patients from a Betel Quid-Prevalent Region

The optimal follow-up protocol after treatment of oral cavity cancer patients is still debatable. We aimed to investigate the impact of frequency of different imaging studies and follow-up visits on the survival of oral cavity cancer patients. The current study retrospectively reviewed oral cavity cancer patients who underwent surgical intervention in our hospital. Basic demographic data, tumor-related features, treatment modalities, imaging studies, and clinic visits were recorded. Cox proportional hazard model was used to examine the influence of variables on the survival of oral cavity cancer patients. In total, 741 patients with newly diagnosed oral cavity cancer were included in the final analysis. Overall, the frequency of imaging studies was not associated with survival in the multivariate analysis, except PET scan (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.57–7.86). However, in late-stage and elder patients, frequent head and neck CT/MRI scan was associated with a better prognosis (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.36–0.84; HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.30–0.91, respectively). In conclusion, precision medicine is a global trend nowadays. Different subgroups may need different follow-up protocols. Further prospective study is warranted to clarify the relationship between frequency of image studies and survival of oral cavity cancer patients.

Prognostic factor analysis and long-term results of the TAX 323 (EORTC 24971) study in unresectable head and neck cancer patients

BACKGROUND

In the TAX 323 (EORTC 24971) phase III trial enrolling patients with unresectable locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA-SCCHN), the addition of docetaxel (T) to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF)-based induction chemotherapy prior to definite radiotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

The data were updated for PFS, OS and treatment-related long-term side-effects. Baseline clinical and laboratory data of 17 variables were collected and subjected to univariate and multivariate prognostic factor analyses for OS.

RESULTS

All 358 patients randomised between 1999 and 2002 were included in the long-term analysis with a median follow-up of 8.6 years. The primary end-point of PFS remained significantly improved with TPF compared with PF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.56-0.88, p = 0.002), translating into a persisting benefit in OS (adjusted HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.95, p = 0.015). Long-term side-effects in the TPF/PF arms comprised tracheostomy (7%/5%), feeding tube dependency (3%/6%) and gastrostomy (11%/11%). Second malignancy occurred in 8%/3%, respectively. Out of 177 patients randomised to the TPF arm, 160 were included in the multivariate analysis. Grade 2 or more dysphagia (p = 0.002) and grade 2 or more pain (p = 0.004) at baseline were identified as independent negative prognostic factors. In addition, OS differed across primary tumour sites (p = 0.027) and was worse in patients with a higher N-stage (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

In LA-SCCHN patients treated with sequential chemoradiotherapy, TPF induction chemotherapy demonstrated long-lasting efficacy, superior to the PF regimen. Higher-grade dysphagia and pain are unfavourable prognosticators.

Identification and management of late dysfunction in survivors of head and neck cancer: Implementation and outcomes of an interdisciplinary quality of life (IQOL) clinic

BACKGROUND

Identifying and treating late dysfunction in survivors of head and neck cancer (HNC) is important; however, an effective way to do so is not established.

METHODS

A quality improvement initiative altering our HNC survivorship clinic to include surveillance by rehabilitation providers was undertaken. The nature of dysfunction identified, along with the number and type of referrals to ancillary/support services were collected and compared to baseline.

RESULTS

The baseline, single-provider, clinic evaluated 61 patients and referred 2 (3%) to ancillary/support services. Fifty-seven patients were evaluated in the interdisciplinary clinic, with 36 (63%) referred to at least one ancillary/support service for new/progressive dysfunction. Of 59 referrals made, 22 (37%) were for dysphagia, 17(29%) were for neck/shoulder dysfunction, and 28 (47%) were attended by the patient.

CONCLUSION

Many HNC survivors exhibit late dysfunction appropriate for referral to ancillary/support services. A survivorship clinic including surveillance by rehabilitation specialists may optimize identification of dysfunction.

Oligometastatic Disease Management: Finding the Sweet Spot

Hematogenous dissemination represents a common manifestation of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and the recommended therapeutic options usually consist of systemically administered drugs with palliative intent. However, mounting evidence suggests that patients with few and slowly progressive distant lesions of small size may benefit from various local ablation techniques, which have already been established as standard-of-care modalities for example in colorectal and renal cell carcinomas and in sarcomas. In principle, serving as radical approaches to eradicate cancer, these interventions can be curative. Their impact on local control and overall survival has been shown in numerous retrospective and prospective studies. The term oligometastatic refers to the number of distant lesions which should generally not surpass five in total, ideally in one organ. Currently, surgical resection remains the method of choice supported by the majority of published data. More recently, stereotactic (ablative) body radiotherapy (SABR/SBRT) has emerged as a viable alternative. In cases technically amenable to such local interventions, several other clinical variables need to be taken into account also, including patient-related factors (general health status, patient preferences, socioeconomic background) and disease-related factors (primary tumor site, growth kinetics, synchronous or metachronous metastases). In head and neck cancer, patients presenting with late development of slowly progressive oligometastatic lesions in the lungs secondary to human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal cancer are the ideal candidates for metastasectomy or other local therapies. However, literature data are still limited to say whether there are other subgroups benefiting from this approach. One of the plausible explanations is that radiological follow-up after primary curative therapy is usually not recommended because its impact on survival has not been unequivocal, which is also due to the rarity of oligometastatic manifestations in this disease. At the same time, aggressive treatment of synchronous metastases early in the disease course should be weighed against the risk of futile interventions in a disease with already multimetastatic microscopic dissemination. Therefore, attentive treatment sequencing, meticulous appraisal of cancer extension, refinement of post-treatment surveillance, and understanding of tumor biology and kinetics are crucial in the management of oligometastases.