Comparison of conventional and hippocampus-sparing radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: In silico study and systematic review

Background and purpose

Radiation-induced damage to the hippocampi can cause cognitive decline. International recommendations for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) radiotherapy (RT) lack specific guidelines for protecting the hippocampi. Our study evaluates if hippocampi-sparing (HS) RT in NPC ensures target coverage and meets recommended dose limits for other at-risk organs.

Materials and methods

In a systematic literature review, we compared hippocampal D40% in conventional and HS RT plans. In an in silico dosimetric study, conventional and HS-VMAT plans were created for each patient, following international recommendations for OAR delineation, dose prioritization and acceptance criteria. We assessed the impact on neurocognitive function using a previously published normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model.

Results

In four previous studies (n = 79), researchers reduced D40% hippocampal radiation doses in HS plans compared to conventional RT on average from 24.9 Gy to 12.6 Gy.Among 12 NPC patients included in this in silico study, statistically significant differences between HS and conventional VMAT plans were observed in hippocampal EQD2 Dmax (23.8 vs. 46.4 Gy), Dmin (3.8 vs. 4.6 Gy), Dmean (8.1 vs. 15.1 Gy), and D40% (8.3 vs. 15.8 Gy). PTV coverage and OAR doses were similar, with less homogeneous PTV coverage in HS plans (p = 0.038). This translated to a lower probability of memory decline in HS plans (interquartile range 15.8-29.6 %) compared to conventional plans (33.8-81.1 %) based on the NTCP model (p = 0.002).

Conclusion

Sparing the hippocampus in NPC RT is safe and feasible. Given the life expectancy of many NPC patients, their cognitive well-being must be paramount in radiotherapy planning.

Post-radiation xerostomia therapy with allogeneic mesenchymal stromal stem cells in patients with head and neck cancer: study protocol for phase I clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Xerostomia is a common side effect of radiotherapy in patients with head and neck tumors that negatively affects quality of life. There is no known effective standard treatment for xerostomia. Here, we present the study protocol used to evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of allogeneic mesenchymal stromal stem cells (MSCs) derived from umbilical cord tissue.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ten oropharyngeal cancer patients with post-radiation xerostomia and no evidence of disease recurrence 2 or more years after (chemo)irradiation (intervention group) and 10 healthy volunteers (control group) will be enrolled in this nonrandomized, open-label, phase I exploratory study. MSCs from umbilical cord tissue will be inserted under ultrasound guidance into both parotid glands and both submandibular glands of the patients. Toxicity of the procedure will be assessed according to CTCAE v5.0 criteria at days 0, 1, 5, 28, and 120. Efficacy will be assessed by measuring salivary flow and analyzing its composition, scintigraphic evaluation of MSC grafting, retention, and migration, and questionnaires measuring subjective xerostomia and quality of life. In addition, the radiological, functional, and morphological characteristics of the salivary tissue will be assessed before, at 4 weeks, and at 4 months after the procedure. In the control group subjects, only salivary flow rate and salivary composition will be determined.

DISCUSSION

The use of allogeneic MSCs from umbilical cord tissue represents an innovative approach for the treatment of xerostomia after radiation. Due to the noninvasive collection procedure, flexibility of cryobanking, and biological advantages, xerostomia therapy using allogeneic MSCs from umbilical cord tissue may have an advantage over other similar therapies.

Improved Survival after Breast-Conserving Therapy Compared with Mastectomy in Stage I-IIA Breast Cancer

Simple Summary

The majority of patients with breast cancer are suitable for either breast-conserving therapy, consisting of breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy, or mastectomy alone. In the present study, we compared survival outcomes in 1360 patients affected with early-stage breast cancer (stage I-IIA) according to the type of local treatment. We confirmed that patients treated with breast-conserving therapy had a lower rate of local, regional, and distant disease recurrences, and at least equivalent overall survival compared to those treated with mastectomy alone. Our results add to previous research showing a potential benefit of breast-conserving therapy when compared to mastectomy in patients suitable for both treatments at baseline.

Abstract

In the current study, we sought to compare survival outcomes after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy alone in patients with stage I-IIA breast cancer, whose tumors are typically suitable for both locoregional treatments. The study cohort consisted of 1360 patients with stage I-IIA (T1–2N0 or T0–1N1) breast cancer diagnosed between 2001 and 2013 and treated with either BCT (n = 1021, 75.1%) or mastectomy alone (n = 339, 24.9%). Median follow-ups for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.9 years (range, 0.3–15.9) and 7.5 years (range, 0.2–25.9), respectively. Fifteen (1.1%), 14 (1.0%) and 48 (3.5%) patients experienced local, regional, and distant relapse, respectively. For the whole cohort of patients, the estimated 5-year DFS and OS were 96% and 97%, respectively. After stratification based on the type of local treatment, the estimated 5-year DFS for BCT was 97%, while it was 91% (p < 0.001) for mastectomy-only treatment. Inverse probability of treatment weighting matching based on confounding confirmed that mastectomy was associated with worse DFS (HR 2.839, 95% CI 1.760–4.579, p < 0.0001), but not with OS (HR 1.455, 95% CI 0.844–2.511, p = 0.177). In our study, BCT was shown to have improved disease-specific outcomes compared to mastectomy alone, emphasizing the important role of adjuvant treatments, including postoperative radiation therapy, in patients with early-stage breast cancer at diagnosis.

Challenges in Combining Immunotherapy with Radiotherapy in Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer

Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has recently become a standard part of the treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC), although the response rates are low. Numerous preclinical and clinical studies have now illuminated several mechanisms by which radiotherapy (RT) enhances the effect of ICI. From RT-induced immunogenic cancer cell death to its effect on the tumor microenvironment and vasculature, the involved mechanisms are diverse and intertwined. Moreover, the research of these interactions is challenging because of the thin line between immunostimulatory and the immunosuppressive effect of RT. In the era of active research of immunoradiotherapy combinations, the significance of treatment and host-related factors that were previously seen as being less important is being revealed. The impact of dose and fractionation of RT is now well established, whereas selection of the number and location of the lesions to be irradiated in a multi-metastatic setting is something that is only now beginning to be understood. In addition to spatial factors, the timing of irradiation is as equally important and is heavily dependent on the type of ICI used. Interestingly, using smaller-than-conventional RT fields or even partial tumor volume RT could be beneficial in this setting. Among host-related factors, the role of the microbiome on immunotherapy efficacy must not be overlooked nor can we neglect the role of gut irradiation in a combined RT and ICI setting. In this review we elaborate on synergistic mechanisms of immunoradiotherapy combinations, in addition to important factors to consider in future immunoradiotherapy trial designs in R/M HNSCC.

Combining radiotherapy and immunotherapy in definitive treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: review of current clinical trials

Background Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) presents as locally advanced disease in a majority of patients and is prone to relapse despite aggressive treatment. Since immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have shown clinically significant efficacy in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC (R/M HNSCC), a plethora of trials are investigating their role in earlier stages of disease. At the same time, preclinical data showed the synergistic role of concurrently administered radiotherapy and ICIs (immunoradiotherapy) and explained several mechanisms behind it. Therefore, this approach is prospectively tested in a neoadjuvant, definitive, or adjuvant setting in non-R/M HNSCC patients. Due to the intricate relationship between host, immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, each of these approaches has its advantages and disadvantages. In this narrative review we present the biological background of immunoradiotherapy, as well as a rationale for, and possible flaws of, each treatment approach, and provide readers with a critical summary of completed and ongoing trials. Conclusions While immunotherapy with ICIs has already become a standard part of treatment in patients with R/M HNSCC, its efficacy in a non-R/M HNSCC setting is still the subject of extensive clinical testing. Irradiation can overcome some of the cancer's immune evasive manoeuvres and can lead to a synergistic effect with ICIs, with possible additional benefits of concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of this combination is not robust and details in trial design and treatment delivery seem to be of unprecedented importance.

Explaining variation in quality of breast cancer care and its impact: a nationwide population-based study from Slovenia

PURPOSE

To assess and explain variation in quality of care in breast cancer patients and estimate its impact on disease outcome.

METHODS

The Slovenian National Cancer Registry database and clinical records of 1053 women with unilateral primarily non-metastatic invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 2013 were reviewed in this retrospective analysis. Quality care was defined as care fully compliant with quality indicators (QI) defined by European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA). Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the predictors of receiving quality care. Differences in overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS, relapse, or progression of disease or death considered an event) based on adherence to QI were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox models.

RESULTS

Younger age, no comorbidities, and HER2-negative tumor were associated with increased odds ratios for receiving quality care, whereas tumor stage and type of hospital had no significant association. Median follow-up was 54.5 months. Not receiving quality care resulted in an increased risk of dying [hazard ratio (HR) 1.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-2.66; p = 0.026]. Difference in EFS between two groups was significant after adjusting for case mix and type of hospital (HR 1.80; 95% CI 1.29-2.52; p = 0.001) but disappeared when type of treatment was added into the model (HR 1.30; 95% CI 0.89-1.90; p = 0.178).

CONCLUSION

Observed comorbidity and age bias in delivering quality breast cancer care could be medically justifiable, whereas observed deviations dependent on HER2 status are puzzling. Complete adherence of treatment to quality indicators resulted in better OS.

Mucosal melanoma of the head and neck: a population-based study from Slovenia, 1985-2013

Objectives

To assess the incidence and to review experience with the treatment of mucosal melanoma of the head and neck (MMHN) in Slovenia between 1985 and 2013.

Methods

The National Cancer Registry database and clinical records with outcome data of identified patients treated during the period 1985–2013 in Slovenia were reviewed.

Results

In a 29-year period, 61 patients with MMHN were identified, representing 0.5 % of all head and neck malignant tumors and 42 % of all mucosal melanomas in Slovenia. 72 % originated in the sinonasal tract and were predominantly (78 %) diagnosed as a local disease. Regional metastases at diagnosis were more frequent in patients with oral/oropharyngeal primary (44 %; sinonasal MMHN 11 %, p = 0.006). Curative intent treatment was given to 48 (79 %) patients. The overall survival (OS) rates at 2 and 5 years for the whole cohort were 43 % and 18 %, respectively, and for the curative intent group 53 % and 24 %, respectively. In the latter group, multivariate analyses showed postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) to be predictive for locoregional control (LRC) (hazard ratios [HR] for surgery with PORT vs. surgery alone: 1.0 vs. 3.9, p = 0.037), whereas only the World Health Organization performance status (HR for grade 0 vs. grade 1 vs. grade >1: 1.0 (p = 0.022) vs. 1.2 (p = 0.640) vs. 7.7 (p = 0.008)) significantly influenced OS.

Conclusions

MMHN is a rare tumor with a poor prognosis. Combination of surgery and PORT offers the best prospects for LRC but without improvement of OS. Due to potential toxicity of high-dose RT such treatment is indicated in patients in whom LRC outweighs the risks of serious adverse effects.