Late toxicities in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy

A comparison of conventional and accelerated hypofractionated radiotherapy in definitive chemoradiation for locally advanced head and neck carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The study evaluates accelerated hypofractionated radiotherapy (AHRT) compared to conventional fractionation radiotherapy (CFRT) in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) receiving definitive chemoradiation therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study includes a retrospective cohort analysis of 120 patients. CFRT arm (n = 65) received 2 Gy per fraction to a dose of 70 Gy over 7 weeks in a three-volume approach, whereas the AHRT arm (n = 55) received 2.2 Gy per fraction to a dose of 66 Gy in 6 weeks with a two-volume approach. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 18.9 months, 23 patients died in the AHRT arm, and 45 deaths in the CFRT arm. The median OS was 23.4 and 37.63 months in the CFRT and AHRT arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.709; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.425-1.18; p = 0.189). The median time to loco-regional control was 33.3 months in the CFRT arm and was not reached in the patient group receiving AHRT (HR = 0.558; 95% CI, 0.30-1.03; p = 0.065). The median progression-free survival was 15.9 months in the CFRT arm and 26.9 months in the AFRT arm (HR = 0.801; 95% CI, 0.49-1.28; p = 0.357). Out of 11 acute toxic deaths, eight were in the CFRT arm.

CONCLUSION

The study showed a trend towards benefit in terms of locoregional control in the AHRT arm and similar OS. A longer follow-up of patients receiving AHRT is required to assess the benefit.

Toxicities and clinical outcome of adjuvant dysphagia optimized versus standard intensity-modulated radiotherapy for post-operative oral cavity cancers: A prospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

We prospectively assessed acute and late toxicity in post-operative oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (PO-OCSCC) treated with adjuvant dysphagia optimized intensity-modulated radiotherapy (Do-IMRT) versus standard IMRT (S-IMRT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty-six patients of PO-SCC without indications of concurrent chemotherapy were alternatively allocated to adjuvant Do-IMRT (n = 28) versus S-IMRT (n = 28) arms. High- and low-risk planning target volume received 60 and 54 Gy, respectively, in 30 fractions over 6 weeks. Dysphagia aspiration-related structures (DARS) were contoured in both arms. While dosimetric constraints were given in Do-IMRT arm, doses to DARS were only observed without dose constraints in S-IMRT arm. Acute and late toxicity were assessed by common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) v5.0 and RTOG criteria, respectively.

RESULTS

The primary site of disease was buccal mucosa (64% vs. 53%) and oral tongue (21% vs. 32%), in Do-IMRT and S-IMRT, respectively. The mean doses to DARS was significantly less with Do-IMRT (all p < 0.001) as compared to S-IMRT. Median follow-up was 24.2 months. Grade ≥2 oral pain was less in the Do-IMRT arm (50% vs. 78.6%, p = 0.05). Grade ≥2 late dysphagia at 2 years were significantly less in Do-IMRT arm (0% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.016). Two-year locoregional control was 89.2% in Do-IMRT and 78.5% in S-IMRT (p = 0.261).

CONCLUSION

DARS can be spared in PO-OCSCC patients treated with Do-IMRT without compromising coverage of the target volumes. Limiting doses to DARS leads to lesser acute and late toxicity without compromising locoregional control.

Real-world study of patients with locally advanced HNSCC in the community oncology setting

Introduction

There is a need to understand the current treatment landscape for LA HNSCC in the real-world setting.

Methods

This retrospective study assessed real-world outcomes and treatment patterns of 1,158 adult patients diagnosed with locally advanced (stage III-IVB) HNSCC initiating chemoradiotherapy (CRT) within the period January 2015 to December 2017 in a large network of US community oncology practices. Structured data were abstracted from electronic health records. Demographic, clinical and treatment characteristics were analyzed descriptively overall and stratified by index treatment (cisplatin + radiotherapy [RT], cisplatin + other chemotherapy + RT, or cetuximab + RT). Time to next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) were measured using the Kaplan-Meier method, and median duration of treatment was assessed. OS was compared across treatment cohorts using multinomial logistic regression with inverse probability treatment weighting. To identify covariates associated with OS, a multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazard model was used.

Results

This study examined 22,782 records, of which 2124 had stage III to stage IVB and no other cancers, and 1158 met all eligibility criteria. Among the treatment cohorts analyzed (cisplatin + RT, cisplatin + other chemotherapy + RT, or cetuximab + RT), cisplatin + RT was the most common concurrent chemotherapy (65.8%). Among 1158 patients, 838 (72.4%) did not initiate subsequent treatment and 139 (12.0%) died. The median TTNT and median OS were only reached by the cetuximab + RT cohort. Among patients with oropharynx primary tumor location, patients with human papilloma virus (HPV) positive status had the longest time on treatment and highest survival at 60 months. Covariates associated with improved survival were never/former tobacco use, HPV positive status, and overweight or obese body mass index. Covariates associated with poorer survival were age of 60+ years, primary tumor location of hypopharynx or oral cavity and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2+.

Conclusion

These data describe real-world treatment patterns in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell cancer and sets the baseline to assess outcomes for future studies on the community oncology population.

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.

Education in Radiation Oncology-Current Challenges and Difficulties

The evolution and development of radiotherapy in the last two decades has meant that postgraduate medical training has not kept up with this rapid progress both in terms of multidisciplinary clinical approaches and especially in terms of technological advances. Education in radiation oncology is a major priority in the context of the rapid development of radiotherapy, including advanced knowledge of radiobiology, radiation physics and clinical oncology, anatomy, tumor biology and advanced medical imaging. In this context, the lack of training in radiation oncology in the curricula of medical faculties may have detrimental consequences for the training of residents in radiotherapy but also in their choice of specialty after completing their university studies. There is a clear gap between resident physicians’ actual and required knowledge of radiotherapy, and this requires urgent remediation. In the context of technical advances in imaging-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and new radiobiology data, a balanced approach divided equally between general oncology, clinical radiation oncology, radiation oncology technology, medical physics and radiobiology, anatomy and multimodal imaging, including mentorship could bring educational and career choice benefits for students of radiation oncology.

Optimal management of recurrent and metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma: Implications of intensity modulated radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is rare and the treatment for recurrent or metastatic UTUC is unclear. We evaluated the outcomes of salvage and palliative radiotherapy (RT) and prognostic factors in UTUC patients and find implications for salvage and palliative RT.

METHODS

Between August 2006 and February 2021, 174 patients (median age, 68 years; range, 37-90) underwent salvage and palliative RT. Disease status at RT included initially diagnosed advanced disease (n = 8, 4.6%), local recurrence only (n = 56, 32.2%), distant metastasis only (n = 59, 33.9%), and local recurrence and distant metastasis (n = 51, 29.3%). The primary tumor location included the renal pelvis (n = 87, 50%), ureter (n = 77, 44.3%), and both (n = 10, 5.7%). Radical nephroureterectomy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy were used in 135 (77.6%), 101 (58%), and 19 (10.9%) patients, respectively. Survival outcomes and prognostic factors were analysed using Cox and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Salvage RT and palliative RT was administered in 73 (42%) and 101 (58%) patients, respectively. The median radiation dose was 45 Gy (range, 15-65). Two-dimensional (2D) or three-dimensional (3D) RT and intensity modulated RT (IMRT) were used in 61 (35.1%) and 113 (64.9%) patients, respectively. The median follow-up was 7.8 months. The median duration of overall survival (OS) was 13.4 months, and the 1-year OS was 53.5%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.7 months, and the 6-month PFS was 41.9%. The 6-month infield PFS was 84%. In multivariate analysis, RT method (2D/3D vs. IMRT, p = 0.007) and RT response (p = 0.008) were independent prognostic factors for OS, and RT response correlated with PFS (p = 0.015). In subgroup analysis in patients with PD-L1 data, positive PD-L1 correlated with better PFS (p = 0.009). RT response-associated factors were concurrent chemotherapy (p = 0.03) and higher radiation dose (p = 0.034). Of 145 patients, 10 (6.9%) developed grade 3 acute or late toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage and palliative RT for UTUC are feasible and effective. Patients with RT response using IMRT may have survival benefit from salvage and palliative RT. Positive PD-L1 status might be related to radiosensitivity. High-dose radiation with concurrent chemotherapy may improve RT response.