Endoscopic follow-up of low-grade precancerous bronchial lesions in high-risk patients: long-term results of the SELEPREBB randomised multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: 3-9% of low-grade preinvasive bronchial lesions progress to cancer. This study assessed the usefulness of an intensive bronchoscopy surveillance strategy in patients with bronchial lesions up to moderate squamous dysplasia. METHODS: SELEPREBB (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00213603) was a randomised study conducted in 17 French centres. After baseline lung computed tomography (CT) and autofluorescence bronchoscopy (AFB) to exclude lung cancer and bronchial severe squamous dysplasia or carcinoma in situ (CIS), patients were assigned to standard surveillance (arm A) with CT and AFB at 36 months or to intensive surveillance (arm B) with AFB every 6 months. Further long-term data were obtained with a median follow-up of 4.7 years. RESULTS: 364 patients were randomised (A: 180, B: 184). 27 patients developed invasive lung cancer and two developed persistent CIS during the study, with no difference between arms (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.20-1.96, p=0.42). Mild or moderate dysplasia at baseline bronchoscopy was a significant lung cancer risk factor both at 3 years (8 of 74 patients, OR 6.9, 95% CI 2.5-18.9, p<0.001) and at maximum follow-up (16 of 74 patients, OR 5.9, 95% CI 2.9-12.0, p<0.001). Smoking cessation was significantly associated with clearance of bronchial dysplasia on follow-up (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01-0.66, p=0.005) and with a reduced risk of lung cancer at 5 years (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.003-0.99, p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Patients with mild or moderate dysplasia are at very high risk for lung cancer at 5 years, with smoking cessation significantly reducing the risk. Whereas intensive bronchoscopy surveillance does not improve patient outcomes, the identification of bronchial dysplasia using initial bronchoscopy maybe useful for risk stratification strategies in lung cancer screening programmes.

Metachronous second primary neoplasia in oropharyngeal cancer patients: Impact of tumor HPV status. A GETTEC multicentric study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) display a significant risk to develop a metachronous second primary neoplasia (MSPN). HPV and non-HPV-related OPSCC are 2 distinct entities with biological, clinical and prognostic differences. The aims of our study were to analyze the impact of tumor HPV status and other relevant clinical factors, such as tobacco and/or alcohol (T/A) consumption, on the risk and distribution of MSPN in OPSCC patients and to assess the impact of MSPN on patient survival. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All OPSCC patients treated from 2009 to 2014 were included in this multicentric retrospective study. P16 immunohistochemical expression was used as a surrogate maker of tumor HPV status. The impact of tumor p16 status on the risk of MSPN was assessed in uni- and multivariate analyses. Overall survival (OS) was determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Among the 1291 patients included in this study, 138 (10.7%) displayed a MSPN which was preferentially located in the head and neck area (H&N), lung and esophagus. Multivariate analyses showed that p16- tumor status (p = 0.003), T/A consumption (p = 0.005) and soft palate tumor site (p = 0.009) were significantly associated with a higher risk of MSPN. We found no impact of p16 tumor status on the median time between index OPSCC diagnosis and MSPN development, but a higher proportion of MSPN arising outside the H&N, lung and esophagus was found in p16 + than in p16- patients. MSPN development had an unfavorable impact (p = 0.04) on OS only in the p16 + patient group. CONCLUSION: P16 tumor status and T/A consumption were the main predictive factors of MSPN in OPSCC patients. This study provides crucial results with a view to tailoring global management and follow-up of OPSCC patients.

Upfront surgery or definitive radiotherapy for p16+ oropharyngeal cancer. A GETTEC multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the initial therapeutic strategy on oncologic outcomes in patients with HPV-positive OPSCC. METHODS: All p16-positive OPSCCs treated from 2009 to 2014 in 7 centers were retrospectively included and classified according to the therapeutic strategy: surgical strategy (surgery ± adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy) vs. non-surgical strategy (definitive radiotherapy ± chemotherapy). Univariate, multivariate propensity score matching analyses were performed to compare overall (OS), disease-specific (DSS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: 382 patients were included (surgical group: 144; non-surgical group: 238). Five-year OS, DSS and RFS were 89.2, 96.8 and 83.9% in the surgical group and 84.2, 87.1 and 70.4% in the non-surgical group, respectively. These differences were statistically significant for DSS and RFS after multivariate analysis, but only for RFS after propensity score matching analysis. CONCLUSION: In p16+ OPSCC patients, upfront surgery results in higher RFS than definitive radiotherapy ± chemotherapy but does not impact OS.

Upfront surgery or definitive radiotherapy for patients with p16-negative oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. A GETTEC multicentric study.

INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic management of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC) is still debated. Since the role of HPV was demonstrated, few studies have focused on HPV-negative OPSCC. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of therapeutic strategy (surgical vs. non-surgical) on oncologic outcomes in patients with HPV-negative OPSCC. MATERIAL AND METHOD: All p16-negative OPSCCs treated from 2009 to 2014 in 7 tertiary-care centers were included in this retrospective study and were classified according to the therapeutic strategy: surgical strategy (surgery ± adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy) vs. non-surgical strategy (definitive radiotherapy ± chemotherapy). Patients not eligible for surgery (unresectable tumor, poor general-health status) were excluded. Univariate, multivariate and propensity score matching analyses were performed to compare overall (OS), disease-specific (DSS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-four (474) patients were included in the study (surgical group: 196; non-surgical group: 278). Five-year OS, DSS and RFS were 76.5, 81.3 and 61.3%, respectively, in the surgical group and 49.9, 61.8 and 43.4%, respectively, in the non-surgical group. The favorable impact of primary surgical treatment on oncologic outcomes was statistically significant after multivariate analysis. This effect was more marked for locally-advanced than for early-stage tumors. Propensity score matching analysis confirmed the prognostic impact of primary surgical treatment for RFS. CONCLUSION: Therapeutic strategy is an independent prognostic factor in patients with p16-negative OPSCC and primary surgical treatment is associated with improved OS, DSS and RFS. These results suggest that surgical strategy is a reliable option for advanced stage OPSCC.

Oropharyngeal cancer: First relapse description and prognostic factor of salvage treatment according to p16 status, a GETTEC multicentric study.

INTRODUCTION: Although Human Papilloma Virus (HPV)-driven oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) prognosis is significantly better than that of other head and neck cancers, up to 25% of cases will recur within 5 years. Data on the pattern of disease recurrence and efficiency of salvage treatment are still sparse. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Observational study of all recurrent OPCs diagnosed, following a curative intent treatment, in seven French centers from 2009 to 2014. p16 Immunohistochemistry was used to determine HPV status. Clinical characteristics, distribution of recurrence site, and treatment modalities were compared by HPV tumor status. Overall survival was examined using Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression modeling. RESULTS: 350 recurrent OPC patients (246 p16-negative and 104 p16-positive patients). The site of recurrence was more frequently locoregional for p16-negative patients (65.4% versus 52.9% in p16-positive patients) and metastatic for p16-positive patients (47.1% versus 34.6% in p16-patients, p = 0.03). Time from diagnosis to recurrence did not differ between p16-positive and p16-negative patients (12 and 9.6 months, respectively, p-value = 0.2), as the main site of distant metastasis (all p-values ≥0.10). Overall and relapse-free survival following the first recurrence did not differ according to p16 status (p-values from log-rank 0.30 and 0.40, respectively). In multivariate analysis, prognosis factors for overall survival in p16-negative patients were distant metastasis (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.30-3.43) and concurrent local and regional recurrences (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.24-3.88). CONCLUSION: With the exception of the initial site of recurrence, the pattern of disease relapse and the efficiency of salvage treatment are not different between p16-positive and negative OPCs.

Synchronous primary neoplasia in patients with oropharyngeal cancer: Impact of tumor HPV status. A GETTEC multicentric study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) display a significant risk of synchronous primary neoplasia (SPN) which could impact their management. The aims of this study were to evaluate the risk and distribution of SPN in OPSCC patients according to their HPV (p16) status, the predictive factors of SPN and the impact of SPN on therapeutic strategy and oncologic outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All OPSCC patients treated from 2009 to 2014 were included in this multicentric retrospective study. Univariate analyses were conducted using Chi-2 and Fisher exact tests. For multivariate analyses, all variables associated with a p ≤ 0.10 in univariate analysis were included in logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among the 1291 patients included in this study, 75 (5.8%) displayed a SPN which was preferentially located in the upper aerodigestive tract, lung and esophagus. Comorbidity level (p = 0.03), alcohol (p = 0.005) and tobacco (p = 0.01) consumptions, and p16 tumor status (p < 0.0001) were significant predictors of SPN. In multivariate analysis, p16+ status was significantly associated with a lower risk of SPN (OR = 0.251, IC95% [0.133;0.474]). Patients with a SPN were more frequently referred for non-curative treatment (p = 0.02). In patients treated with curative intent, there was no impact of SPN on the therapeutic strategy (surgical vs. non-surgical treatment). We observed no overall survival differences between patients with or without SPN. CONCLUSION: P16 tumor status is the main predictive factor of SPN in OPSCC patients. This study provides crucial results which should help adapt the initial work-up and the global management of OPSCC patients.

Impact of HPV-associated p16-expression and other clinical factors on therapeutic decision-making in patients with oropharyngeal cancer: A GETTEC multicentric study.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the impact of tumor p16 status and other clinical factors on the therapeutic decision-making process in patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study (GETTEC collaborative study group) enrolling all OPSCC patients with a determined p16-status considered eligible for surgery between 2009 and 2014. The impact of p16-status and other clinical factors on the therapeutic decision was evaluated in multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 476 patients were enrolled in the study, including 244 cases (51%) of p16-positive OPSCC. Overall, 223 (47%) patients underwent primary surgery, and 184 (83%) of them received postoperative radiotherapy ± chemotherapy. More patients with p16-positive OPSCC tended to undergo non-surgical treatment than did patients with p16-negative OPSCC (p = 0.10). Multivariate analysis showed that 5 factors significantly influenced therapeutic management of the patients: T-stage ≥ 3 (towards a non-surgical strategy; p < 0.001), N-stage ≥ 2a (non-surgical strategy; p = 0.02), tumor involvement of the glosso-tonsillar sulcus (surgical strategy; p = 0.002), tumor extension to the oral cavity (surgical strategy; p < 0.009) and the center of care (p < 0.001). The rate of patients directed towards a surgical strategy varied between 9% and 74% depending on the center. CONCLUSION: There was a non-significant trend to recommend patients with p16-positive OPSCC for non-surgical treatment. Center of care, tumor stage and tumor anatomical subsite and extensions were the main determinants of the treatment choice.

Myxoid liposarcoma: a rare soft-tissue tumor with a misleading benign appearance.

BACKGROUND: Lipoma is by far the most common of all benign soft-tissue tumors which far outnumber malignant tumors. Soft-tissue sarcomas are malignant tumors and are usually named for the type of tissue in which they begin. Liposarcoma (LPS), which arises in the fatty tissue, is rather an uncommon soft-tissue tumor. Multiple histologic subtypes of liposarcoma are recognized, including myxoid liposarcoma, and correspond to tumors of very different prognosis. In two-third of the cases, this tumor occurs in the muscle while often demonstrating a misleading benign appearance as observed in the majority of soft-tissue sarcomas. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 50-year-old man operated on for a fat tumor of the thigh initially diagnosed as lipoma but revealing to be a myxoid liposarcoma after histopathological examination. The initial incomplete tumor excision required the need for a re-excision with adjuvant chemotherapy and complementary radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: When any suspicious soft-tissue tumor is diagnosed, the combined information gathered from accurate preoperative radiographic planning and X-rays or surgical biopsy is of tremendous value for establishing the most appropriate therapeutic program, highly adapted to the histopathological findings.