Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury.

BACKGROUND: This is the third update of the original Cochrane Review published in July 2005 and updated previously in 2012 and 2016. Cancer is a significant global health issue. Radiotherapy is a treatment modality for many malignancies, and about 50% of people having radiotherapy will be long-term survivors. Some will experience late radiation tissue injury (LRTI), developing months or years following radiotherapy. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been suggested as a treatment for LRTI based on the ability to improve the blood supply to these tissues. It is postulated that HBOT may result in both healing of tissues and the prevention of complications following surgery and radiotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) for treating or preventing late radiation tissue injury (LRTI) compared to regimens that excluded HBOT. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 24 January 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of HBOT versus no HBOT on LRTI prevention or healing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. survival from time of randomisation to death from any cause; 2. complete or substantial resolution of clinical problem; 3. site-specific outcomes; and 4. ADVERSE EVENTS: Our secondary outcomes were 5. resolution of pain; 6. improvement in quality of life, function, or both; and 7. site-specific outcomes. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen studies contributed to this review (1071 participants) with publications ranging from 1985 to 2022. We added four new studies to this updated review and evidence for the treatment of radiation proctitis, radiation cystitis, and the prevention and treatment of osteoradionecrosis (ORN). HBOT may not prevent death at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 1.83; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 166 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is some evidence that HBOT may result in complete resolution or provide significant improvement of LRTI (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.89; I2 = 64%; 5 RCTs, 468 participants; low-certainty evidence) and HBOT may result in a large reduction in wound dehiscence following head and neck soft tissue surgery (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.94; I2 = 70%; 2 RCTs, 264 participants; low-certainty evidence). In addition, pain scores in ORN improve slightly after HBOT at 12 months (mean difference (MD) -10.72, 95% CI -18.97 to -2.47; I2 = 40%; 2 RCTs, 157 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse events, HBOT results in a higher risk of a reduction in visual acuity (RR 4.03, 95% CI 1.65 to 9.84; 5 RCTs, 438 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was a risk of ear barotrauma in people receiving HBOT when no sham pressurisation was used for the control group (RR 9.08, 95% CI 2.21 to 37.26; I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 357 participants; high-certainty evidence), but no such increase when a sham pressurisation was employed (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.52 to 2.21; I2 = 74%; 2 RCTs, 158 participants; high-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: These small studies suggest that for people with LRTI affecting tissues of the head, neck, bladder and rectum, HBOT may be associated with improved outcomes (low- to moderate-certainty evidence). HBOT may also result in a reduced risk of wound dehiscence and a modest reduction in pain following head and neck irradiation. However, HBOT is unlikely to influence the risk of death in the short term. HBOT also carries a risk of adverse events, including an increased risk of a reduction in visual acuity (usually temporary) and of ear barotrauma on compression. Hence, the application of HBOT to selected participants may be justified. The small number of studies and participants, and the methodological and reporting inadequacies of some of the primary studies included in this review demand a cautious interpretation. More information is required on the subset of disease severity and tissue type affected that is most likely to benefit from this therapy, the time for which we can expect any benefits to persist and the most appropriate oxygen dose. Further research is required to establish the optimum participant selection and timing of any therapy. An economic evaluation should also be undertaken.

What is the effect of a low literacy talking book on patient knowledge, anxiety and communication before radiation therapy starts? A pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy is a common cancer treatment, requiring timely information to help patients prepare for treatment. We pilot tested a low literacy, psycho-educational talking book (written booklet, with accompanying audio recording) to examine (i) the effect of the tool on knowledge, anxiety and communication; (ii) acceptability, and (iii) how it was used in appointments. METHODS: A pre-post design was employed. Patients scheduled to receive radiation therapy for any cancer were recruited from two hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Participants were sent the talking book before treatment planning and completed baseline and follow-up surveys, before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Forty participants were recruited, and 39 completed all study assessments. Overall, knowledge increased after receiving the talking book by 3.8 points from 13.9 to 17.7/20 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.7, 4.8, P < 0.001). Anxiety and concerns were significantly lower after receiving the talking book (P = 0.015 and P = 0.004, respectively). Nearly half of participants (s = 17, 48%) reported using the book during appointments. Most reported finding it easier to communicate (n = 31, 89%) and to ask more questions (n = 21, 62%). CONCLUSION: The talking book shows promise in improving knowledge, reducing anxiety and enhancing communication. Strategies to support the implementation of the talking book are required. Further studies to translate the book into different languages are also planned.

Best Evidence to Best Practice: Implementing an Innovative Model of Nutrition Care for Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Improves Outcomes.

Malnutrition is prevalent in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), impacting outcomes. Despite publication of nutrition care evidence-based guidelines (EBGs), evidence-practice gaps exist. This study aimed to implement and evaluate the integration of a patient-centred, best-practice dietetic model of care into an HNC multidisciplinary team (MDT) to minimise the detrimental sequelae of malnutrition. A mixed-methods, pre-post study design was used to deliver key interventions underpinned by evidence-based implementation strategies to address identified barriers and facilitators to change at individual, team and system levels. A data audit of medical records established baseline adherence to EBGs and clinical parameters prior to implementation in a prospective cohort. Key interventions included a weekly Supportive Care-Led Pre-Treatment Clinic and a Nutrition Care Dashboard highlighting nutrition outcome data integrated into MDT meetings. Focus groups provided team-level evaluation of the new model of care. Economic analysis determined system-level impact. The baseline clinical audit (n = 98) revealed barriers including reactive nutrition care, lack of familiarity with EBGs or awareness of intensive nutrition care needs as well as infrastructure and dietetic resource limitations. Post-implementation data (n = 34) demonstrated improved process and clinical outcomes: pre-treatment dietitian assessment; use of a validated nutrition assessment tool before, during and after treatment. Patients receiving the new model of care were significantly more likely to complete prescribed radiotherapy and systemic therapy. Differences in mean percentage weight change were clinically relevant. At the system level, the new model of care avoided 3.92 unplanned admissions and related costs of $AUD121K per annum. Focus groups confirmed clear support at the multidisciplinary team level for continuing the new model of care. Implementing an evidence-based nutrition model of care in patients with HNC is feasible and can improve outcomes. Benefits of this model of care may be transferrable to other patient groups within cancer settings.

A low literacy targeted talking book about radiation therapy for cancer: development and acceptability.

PURPOSE: To develop a low literacy talking book (written book with accompanying audio-recording) about radiation therapy and explore its acceptability with patients and caregivers. METHOD: The talking book was developed iteratively using low literacy design principles and a multidisciplinary committee comprising consumers and experts in radiation oncology, nursing, behavioural sciences, and linguistics. It contained illustrations, photos, and information on: treatment planning, daily treatment, side effects, psychosocial health, and a glossary of medical terms. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients who self-reported low functional health literacy and caregivers to explore their views on the resource. Thematic analysis using a framework approach informed the analysis. RESULTS: Participants were very satisfied with the content, illustrations, and language in the resource. Most were unfamiliar with the term 'talking book', but liked the option of different media (text and audio). The resource was seen as facilitating communication with the cancer care team by prompting question-asking and equipping patients and their families with knowledge to communicate confidently. CONCLUSIONS: The low literacy talking book was well accepted by patients and their caregivers. The next step is to examine the effect of the resource on patients' knowledge, anxiety, concerns, and communication with the cancer care team.

Hyperbaric oxygenation for tumour sensitisation to radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a common disease and radiotherapy is one well-established treatment for some solid tumours. Hyperbaric oxygenation therapy (HBOT) may improve the ability of radiotherapy to kill hypoxic cancer cells, so the administration of radiotherapy while breathing hyperbaric oxygen may result in a reduction in mortality and recurrence. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of administering radiotherapy for the treatment of malignant tumours while breathing HBO. SEARCH METHODS: In September 2017 we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library Issue 8, 2017, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Database of Randomised Trials in Hyperbaric Medicine using the same strategies used in 2011 and 2015, and examined the reference lists of included articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised studies comparing the outcome of malignant tumours following radiation therapy while breathing HBO versus air or an alternative sensitising agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of and extracted data from the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: We included 19 trials in this review (2286 participants: 1103 allocated to HBOT and 1153 to control).For head and neck cancer, there was an overall reduction in the risk of dying at both one year and five years after therapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.98, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 11 and RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98, high-quality evidence), and some evidence of improved local tumour control immediately following irradiation (RR with HBOT 0.58, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.85, moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision). There was a lower incidence of local recurrence of tumour when using HBOT at both one and five years (RR at one year 0.66, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.78, high-quality evidence; RR at five years 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95, moderate-quality evidence due to inconsistency between trials). There was also some evidence with regard to the chance of metastasis at five years (RR with HBOT 0.45 95% CI 0.09 to 2.30, single trial moderate quality evidence imprecision). No trials reported a quality of life assessment. Any benefits come at the cost of an increased risk of severe local radiation reactions with HBOT (severe radiation reaction RR 2.64, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.23, high-quality evidence). However, the available evidence failed to clearly demonstrate an increased risk of seizures from acute oxygen toxicity (RR 4.3, 95% CI 0.47 to 39.6, moderate-quality evidence).For carcinoma of the uterine cervix, there was no clear benefit in terms of mortality at either one year or five years (RR with HBOT at one year 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.11, high-quality evidence; RR at five years 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14, moderate-quality evidence due to inconsistency between trials). Similarly, there was no clear evidence of a benefit of HBOT in the reported rate of local recurrence (RR with HBOT at one year 0.82, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06, high-quality evidence; RR at five years 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.13, moderate-quality evidence due to inconsistency between trials). We also found no clear evidence for any effect of HBOT on the rate of development of metastases at both two years and five years (two years RR with HBOT 1.05, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.31, high quality evidence; five years RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.26, moderate-quality evidence due to inconsistency). There were, however, increased adverse effects with HBOT. The risk of a severe radiation injury at the time of treatment with HBOT was 2.05, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.46, high-quality evidence. No trials reported any failure of local tumour control, quality of life assessments, or the risk of seizures during treatment.With regard to the treatment of urinary bladder cancer, there was no clear evidence of a benefit in terms of mortality from HBOT at one year (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.27, high-quality evidence), nor any benefit in the risk of developing metastases at two years (RR 2.0, 95% CI 0.58 to 6.91, moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision). No trial reported on failure of local control, local recurrence, quality of life, or adverse effects.When all cancer types were combined, there was evidence for an increased risk of severe radiation tissue injury during the course of radiotherapy with HBOT (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.66 to 3.33, high-quality evidence) and of oxygen toxic seizures during treatment (RR with HBOT 6.76, 96% CI 1.16 to 39.31, moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence that HBOT improves local tumour control, mortality, and local tumour recurrence for cancers of the head and neck. These benefits may only occur with unusual fractionation schemes. Hyperbaric oxygenation therapy is associated with severe tissue radiation injury. Given the methodological and reporting inadequacies of the included studies, our results demand a cautious interpretation. More research is needed for head and neck cancer, but is probably not justified for uterine cervical or bladder cancer. There is little evidence available concerning malignancies at other anatomical sites.

Postoperative Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Versus Postoperative Radiotherapy in High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: The Randomized Phase III TROG 05.01 Trial.

Purpose To report the results of the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group randomized phase III trial designed to determine whether the addition of concurrent chemotherapy to postoperative radiotherapy (CRT) improved locoregional control in patients with high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Patients and Methods The primary objective was to determine whether there was a difference in freedom from locoregional relapse (FFLRR) between 60 or 66 Gy (6 to 6.5 weeks) with or without weekly carboplatin (area under the curve 2) after resection of gross disease. Secondary efficacy objectives were to compare disease-free survival and overall survival. Results Three hundred twenty-one patients were randomly assigned, with 310 patients commencing allocated treatment (radiotherapy [RT] alone, n = 157; CRT, n = 153). Two hundred thirty-eight patients (77%) had high-risk nodal disease, 59 (19%) had high-risk primary or in-transit disease, and 13 (4%) had both. Median follow-up was 60 months. Median RT dose was 60 Gy, with 84% of patients randomly assigned to CRT completing six cycles of carboplatin. The 2- and 5-year FFLRR rates were 88% (95% CI, 83% to 93%) and 83% (95% CI, 77% to 90%), respectively, for RT and 89% (95% CI, 84% to 94%) and 87% (95% CI, 81% to 93%; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.55; P = .58), respectively, for CRT. There were no significant differences in disease-free or overall survival. Locoregional failure was the most common site of first treatment failure, with isolated distant metastases as the first site of failure seen in 7% of both arms. Treatment was well tolerated in both arms, with no observed enhancement of RT toxicity with carboplatin. Grade 3 or 4 late toxicities were infrequent. Conclusion Although surgery and postoperative RT provided excellent FFLRR, there was no observed benefit with the addition of weekly carboplatin.

Patients' experience of decision-making and receiving information during radiation therapy: A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to explore: (i) patient perceptions of how they are involved in treatment decisions about radiation therapy; (ii) patient knowledge and understanding of treatment; and (iii) what patients value in their interactions with the radiation therapy treatment team. METHOD: Patients were recruited through radiation oncology departments at metropolitan hospital sites located in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 radiation therapy patients with different types of cancer. Data were analysed using a Framework analysis to compare and contrast patient experiences. RESULTS: Most patients perceived the decision to undergo radiation therapy as agreeing to radiation oncologists recommendations rather than making a choice, but they trusted their radiation oncologist and were happy to follow their advice. Only a few participants reported their radiation oncologist had explained why radiation therapy was recommended, or discussed the benefits and harms. Some participants did not feel prepared for the intensity and disruption of side effects, and conveyed uncertainty about their diagnosis and the potential risk of recurrence. Most patients, irrespective of their type of cancer, valued the treatment team showing a genuine interest in how the treatment was effecting them, and being made to feel part of the department. CONCLUSION: Greater opportunities are needed to empower patients to ask questions about their uncertainties and concerns. Improvements in these areas will benefit patients and enable them to feel better prepared and know what to expect before and after their treatment.

Barriers to radiotherapy utilization: Consumer perceptions of issues influencing radiotherapy-related decisions.

AIMS: Radiation therapy (RT) is an essential and cost-effective cancer treatment, but it is underutilized in Australia. We aimed to quantify consumers' perceptions of factors that influence RT decisions. METHODS: A cross-sectional, survey-based study was conducted in March-August 2012. Potential participants were invited to complete an electronic survey disseminated through multiple patient support and advocacy groups throughout New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Study invitations were also placed in local newspapers across NSW with hard copy surveys mailed to respondents. Current or past cancer patients (and carers) who had been offered RT were eligible to participate regardless of their RT decision. RESULTS: Of the 1191 participants (electronic, n = 1153; hard copy, n = 38), 91% were female, most (88%) were current or past patients, and 78% had accepted RT. Issues commonly perceived to be moderate to strong influencers of RT decisions were: concern about acute and long-term side effects; management of side effects; fear and anxiety regarding RT; lack of awareness of RT; lack of local availability of RT; and lack of RT information resources. Those who declined RT were significantly more likely to highlight practical difficulties with receiving RT. CONCLUSIONS: Although availability of RT is well recognized, other issues such as fear and anxiety about RT and perceived side effects appear to feature prominently in consumers' decisions. Perceived practical difficulties with receiving RT may have influenced those who declined RT. There may be a need for information resources, support services and interventions to increase awareness of RT.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a significant global health problem. Radiotherapy is a treatment for many cancers and about 50% of people having radiotherapy will be long-term survivors. Some will experience late radiation tissue injury (LRTI) developing months or years later. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been suggested as a treatment for LRTI based upon the ability to improve the blood supply to these tissues. It is postulated that HBOT may result in both healing of tissues and the prevention of problems following surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of HBOT for treating or preventing LRTI. SEARCH METHODS: We updated the searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 11), MEDLINE, EMBASE, DORCTIHM and reference lists of articles in December 2015. We also searched for ongoing trials at clinicaltrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of HBOT versus no HBOT on LRTI prevention or healing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant trials using the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and extracted the data from the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen trials contributed to this review (753 participants). There was some moderate quality evidence that HBOT was more likely to achieve mucosal coverage with osteoradionecrosis (ORN) (risk ratio (RR) 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 1.6, P value = 0.003, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 5; 246 participants, 3 studies). There was also moderate quality evidence of a significantly improved chance of wound breakdown without HBOT following operative treatment for ORN (RR 4.2; 95% CI 1.1 to 16.8, P value = 0.04, NNTB 4; 264 participants, 2 studies). From single studies there was a significantly increased chance of improvement or cure following HBOT for radiation proctitis (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.0 to 2.9, P value = 0.04, NNTB 5), and following both surgical flaps (RR 8.7; 95% CI 2.7 to 27.5, P value = 0.0002, NNTB 4) and hemimandibulectomy (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.8, P value = 0.001, NNTB 5). There was also a significantly improved probability of healing irradiated tooth sockets following dental extraction (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.7, P value = 0.009, NNTB 4).There was no evidence of benefit in clinical outcomes with established radiation injury to neural tissue, and no randomised data reported on the use of HBOT to treat other manifestations of LRTI. These trials did not report adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: These small trials suggest that for people with LRTI affecting tissues of the head, neck, anus and rectum, HBOT is associated with improved outcome. HBOT also appears to reduce the chance of ORN following tooth extraction in an irradiated field. There was no such evidence of any important clinical effect on neurological tissues. The application of HBOT to selected participants and tissues may be justified. Further research is required to establish the optimum participant selection and timing of any therapy. An economic evaluation should be undertaken.

Rising prevalence of human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal cancer in Australia over the last 2 decades.

BACKGROUND: This study provides Australian data on the characteristics of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) over the last 2 decades. METHODS: The HPV status of 515 patients with oropharyngeal SCC diagnosed between 1987 and 2010 was determined by HPV E6-targeted multiplex real time polymerase chain reaction assay (PCR) and p16 immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The HPV positivity rate increased from 20.2% (1987-1995) to 63.5% (2006-2010). Among HPV-positive oropharyngeal SCC over the study period, the median age increased from 55.4 years to 59.8 years (p = .004) and there was a trend of an increasing proportion of never smokers (19.2% to 34.0%). The use of radiation therapy (RT) in patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer increased from 26.9% to 68.1% (p = .007) and we also observed a trend of improved outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our data show a rising prevalence of HPV-positive oropharyngeal SCC in Australia over the last 2 decades. These patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal SCC are now presenting at an older age and about one third have never smoked.

What is access to radiation therapy? A conceptual framework and review of influencing factors.

OBJECTIVES: Optimal radiation therapy (RT) utilisation rates (RURs) have been defined for various cancer indications through extensive work in Australia and overseas. These benchmarks remain unrealised. The gap between optimal RUR and actual RUR has been attributed to inadequacies in 'RT access'. We aimed to develop a conceptual framework for the consideration of 'RT access' by examining the literature for existing constructs and translating it to the context of RT services. We further aimed to use this framework to identify and examine factors influencing 'RT access'. METHODS: Existing models of health care access were reviewed and used to develop a multi-dimensional conceptual framework for 'RT access'. A review of the literature was then conducted to identify factors reported to affect RT access and utilisation. The electronic databases searched, the host platform and date range of the databases searched were Ovid MEDLINE, 1946 to October 2014 and PsycINFO via OvidSP,1806 to October 2014. RESULTS: The framework developed demonstrates that 'RT access' encompasses opportunity for RT as well as the translation of this opportunity to RT utilisation. Opportunity for RT includes availability, affordability, adequacy (quality) and acceptability of RT services. Several factors at the consumer, referrer and RT service levels affect the translation of this opportunity for RT to actual RT utilisation. CONCLUSION: 'Access' is a term that is widely used in the context of health service related research, planning and political discussions. It is a multi-faceted concept with many descriptions. We propose a conceptual framework for the consideration of 'RT access' so that factors affecting RT access and utilisation may be identified and examined. Understanding these factors, and quantifying them where possible, will allow objective evaluation of their impact on RT utilisation and guide implementation of strategies to modify their effects.

Barriers to radiotherapy utilisation in New South Wales Australia: Health professionals' perceptions of impacting factors.

INTRODUCTION: Utilisation of radiation therapy (RT) in Australia is below recommended evidence-based benchmarks. Barriers to the referral of patients for RT and the uptake of RT by patients may be affecting RT utilisation. The current study aimed to examine health professionals' (HPs) perceptions of potential barriers to RT referral and uptake. METHODS: A custom survey was developed to assess perceptions regarding the degree to which a range of issues affect decisions regarding RT. Hard copy surveys were disseminated to HPs involved in the care of cancer patients across New South Wales (NSW): medical, radiation and surgical oncologists, physicians (including palliative care), and general practitioners with an interest in oncology. Electronic versions of the survey were disseminated via oncology multidisciplinary teams and professional networks at participating hospitals. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-three HPs participated via hard copy (n = 208) or electronic (n = 45) surveys. Two-thirds of HPs perceived acute side effects of RT, their management and impact on daily commitments, as well as fear and anxiety about RT, to exert moderate to significant influence on RT decisions. Treatment-related travel, need for accommodation and relocation were also perceived by 64% of HPs to do the same. Over half of HPs rated concern regarding late effects of RT, disruption to family and work life, and the ability to organise family and work commitments around RT, as moderate to significant influences on RT uptake. CONCLUSION: Perceptions of HPs in NSW reveal potential important influencers of RT decisions by patients and clinicians. An understanding of these additional issues and their actual impact on RT-related decisions may inform future interventions to improve RT access and utilisation.

Factors influencing the use of RT in NSW: a qualitative study exploring consumer and health professional perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Radiotherapy (RT) is an essential and cost-effective cancer treatment. It is underutilised in Australia. Bridging the gap between actual and optimal RT utilisation requires not only provision of adequate RT infrastructure but also an understanding of the factors that influence the extent to which this opportunity for RT is utilised. This study explored factors perceived to affect RT-related decision making by consumers and health professionals (HPs). METHODS: Six semi-structured focus groups (FGs) and 13 interviews were conducted at three geographical locations in NSW, Australia (n = 26 consumers and 30 HPs). Audio recordings of FGs and interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: An exhaustive list of issues perceived to affect consumer and HP RT decisions was identified. There were common themes across participant groups and locations. Perceptions of RT and its benefits, as well as accurate communication of the expected benefits and risks of RT, were highlighted as important to decision making. Perceived factors relating to 'inconvenience' of RT were multifaceted and included travel, relocation, accommodation, time away from work and financial challenges. Perceived potential barriers to RT referral included knowledge of RT and RT services, availability of a local or visiting RT service, referrer bias, and the low profile of RT. CONCLUSIONS: Important drivers during RT decisions appear to include the perceived benefit, risks and inconvenience of RT. Underutilisation of RT may also result from multiple barriers at the referrer level. Further research into whether these factors influence actual RT decisions is needed.

Human papillomavirus, smoking status and outcomes in tonsillar squamous cell carcinoma.

It is now clear that the two separate entitles of tonsillar cancer, HPV induced and non-HPV induced (smoking induced), have significantly different presenting stage and outcomes. A significant proportion of patients with human papillomavirus positive tonsillar cancer have had exposure to smoking. We examined the combined effect of human papillomavirus and smoking on the outcomes and determined whether smoking can modify the beneficial effect of human papillomavirus. A total of 403 patients from nine centers were followed up for recurrence or death for a median of 38 months. Determinants of the rate of loco-regional recurrence, death from tonsillar cancer and overall survival were modeled using Cox regression. Smoking status was a significant predictor of overall survival (p = 0.04). There were nonstatistically significant trends favoring never smokers for loco-regional recurrence and disease specific survival. In addition, there was no statistically significant interactions between smoking and human papillomavirus (p-values for the interaction were 0.26 for loco-regional recurrence, 0.97 for disease specific survival and 0.73 for overall survival). The effect of smoking on loco-regional recurrence and disease specific survival outcomes was not statistically significant, nor was there significant evidence that the effect of smoking status on these outcomes was modified by HPV status. Irrespective of HPV status, however, smokers did have poorer overall survival than never-smokers, presumably due to effects of smoking that are unrelated to the primary cancer.

HPV status of oropharyngeal cancer by combination HPV DNA/p16 testing: biological relevance of discordant results.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Human papillomavirus (HPV) causes up to 70 % of oropharyngeal cancers (OSCC). HPV positive OSCC has a more favorable outcome, thus HPV status is being used to guide treatment and predict outcome. Combination HPV DNA/p16(ink4) (p16) testing is commonly used for HPV status, but there are no standardized methods, scoring or interpretative criteria. The significance of discordant (HPV DNA positive/p16 negative and HPV DNA negative/p16 positive) cancers is controversial. In this study, 647 OSCCs from 10 Australian centers were tested for HPV DNA/p16 expression. Our aims are to determine p16 distribution by HPV DNA status to inform decisions on p16 scoring and to assess clinical significance of discordant cancers. METHODS: HPV DNA was identified using a multiplex tandem HPV E6 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay and p16 expression by semiquantitative immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: p16 distribution was essentially bimodal (42 % of cancers had ≥ 70 % positive staining, 52 % <5 % positive, 6 % between 5 and 70 %). Cancers with 5 to <50 % staining had similar characteristics to the p16 negative group, and cancers with 50 to <70 % staining were consistent with the ≥ 70 % group. Using a p16 cut-point of 50 %, there were 25 % HPV DNA positive/p16 negative cancers and 1 % HPV DNA negative/p16 positive cancers. HPV DNA positive/p16 negative cancers had outcomes similar to HPV DNA negative/p16 negative cancers. CONCLUSIONS: 50 % is a reasonable cut-point for p16; HPV DNA positive/p16 negative OSCCs may be treated as HPV negative for clinical purposes; HPV DNA/p16 testing may add no prognostic information over p16 alone.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a significant global health problem. Radiotherapy is a treatment for many cancers and about 50% of patients having radiotherapy with be long-term survivors. Some will experience late radiation tissue injury (LRTI) developing months or years later. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been suggested as a treatment for LRTI based upon the ability to improve the blood supply to these tissues. It is postulated that HBOT may result in both healing of tissues and the prevention of problems following surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of HBOT for treating or preventing LRTI. SEARCH METHODS: In March 2011 we updated the searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1), MEDLINE, EMBASE, DORCTIHM and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of HBOT versus no HBOT on LRTI prevention or healing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant trials using the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and extracted the data from the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven trials contributed to this review (669 participants). For pooled analyses, investigation of heterogeneity suggested important variability between trials but there was some evidence that HBOT is more likely to achieve mucosal coverage with osteoradionecrosis (ORN) (risk ratio (RR) 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 1.6, P = 0.003, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 5). From single studies there was a significantly increased chance of improvement or cure following HBOT for radiation proctitis (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.0 to 2.9, P = 0.04, NNTB 5), and following both surgical flaps (RR 8.7; 95% CI 2.7 to 27.5, P = 0.0002, NNTB = 4) and hemimandibulectomy (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.8, P = 0.001, NNTB 5). There was also a significantly improved probability of healing irradiated tooth sockets following dental extraction (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.7, P = 0.009, NNTB 4).There was no evidence of benefit in clinical outcomes with established radiation injury to neural tissue, and no data reported on the use of HBOT to treat other manifestations of LRTI. These trials did not report adverse effects. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: These small trials suggest that for people with LRTI affecting tissues of the head, neck, anus and rectum, HBOT is associated with improved outcome. HBOT also appears to reduce the chance of ORN following tooth extraction in an irradiated field. There was no such evidence of any important clinical effect on neurological tissues. The application of HBOT to selected patients and tissues may be justified. Further research is required to establish the optimum patient selection and timing of any therapy. An economic evaluation should be undertaken.

Hyperbaric oxygenation for tumour sensitisation to radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a common disease and radiotherapy is one well-established treatment for some solid tumours. Hyperbaric oxygenation therapy (HBOT) may improve the ability of radiotherapy to kill hypoxic cancer cells, so the administration of radiotherapy while breathing hyperbaric oxygen may result in a reduction in mortality and recurrence. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of radiotherapy while breathing HBO. SEARCH METHODS: In March 2011 we searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE, DORCTHIM and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised studies comparing the outcome of malignant tumours following radiation therapy while breathing HBO versus air. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant trials and extracted the data from the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: Nineteen trials contributed to this review (2286 patients: 1103 allocated to HBOT and 1153 to control). With HBOT, there was a reduction in mortality for head and neck cancers at both one year and five years after therapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, P = 0.03, number needed to treat (NNT) = 11; and RR 0.82, P = 0.03, NNT = 5 respectively), as well as improved local tumour control at three months (RR with HBOT 0.58, P = 0.006, NNT = 7). The effect of HBOT varied with different fractionation schemes. Local tumour recurrence was less likely with HBOT at one year (head and neck: RR 0.66, P < 0.0001, NNT = 5), two years (uterine cervix: RR 0.60, P = 0.04, NNT = 5) and five years (head and neck: (RR 0.77, P = 0.01, NNT = 6). Any advantage is achieved at the cost of some adverse effects. There was a significant increase in the rate of both severe radiation tissue injury (RR 2.35, P < 0.0001, (number needed to harm (NNH) = 8) and the chance of seizures during therapy (RR 6.76, P = 0.03, NNH = 22) with HBOT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that HBOT improves local tumour control and mortality for cancers of the head and neck, and local tumour recurrence in cancers of the head and neck, and uterine cervix. These benefits may only occur with unusual fractionation schemes. HBOT is associated with significant adverse effects including oxygen toxic seizures and severe tissue radiation injury. The methodological and reporting inadequacies of the studies included demand a cautious interpretation. More research is needed for head and neck cancer, but is probably not justified for bladder cancer. There is little evidence available concerning malignancies at other anatomical sites on which to base a recommendation.

Metastatic head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: defining a low-risk patient.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a "low-risk" subset of patients with regional metastatic head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) suitable for treatment with surgery alone and omission of adjuvant radiotherapy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 168 patients with a single parotid gland or neck nodal metastasis ≤3 cm in size from cutaneous SCC treated with curative intent by surgery ± adjuvant radiotherapy. RESULTS: Disease-specific survival for the 33 patients treated with surgery alone was 97% at 5 years. In the subset of 19 patients without extracapsular nodal spread (ECS), there was 1 regional recurrence which was successfully salvaged yielding a 5-year disease-specific survival of 100%. CONCLUSION: In head and neck cutaneous SCC, the subset with a single node ≤3 cm in size without ECS are at low risk of regional failure and death from cutaneous cancer. These patients may be suitable for single-modality therapy with surgery alone.

Use of cyclin D1 in conjunction with human papillomavirus status to predict outcome in oropharyngeal cancer.

There is increasing use of multiple molecular markers to predict prognosis in human cancer. Our aim was to examine the prognostic significance of cyclin D1 and retinoblastoma (pRb) expression in association with human papillomavirus (HPV) status in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Clinical records and specimens of 226 patients with follow-up from 1 to 235 months postdiagnosis were retrieved. Tumor HPV status was determined by HPV E6-targeted multiplex real-time PCR/p16 semiquantitative immunohistochemistry and cyclin D1 and pRb expression by semiquantitative immunohistochemistry. Determinants of recurrence and mortality hazards were modeled using Cox regression with censoring at dates of last follow-up. The HPV-positivity rate was 37% (91% type 16). HPV was a predictor of recurrence, an event (recurrence or death) and death after adjustment for clinicopathological variables. There were inverse relationships between HPV status and cyclin D1 and pRb. On univariate analysis, cyclin D1 predicted locoregional recurrence, event and death and pRb predicted event and death. Within the HPV-positive group, after adjusting for clinicopathological factors, patients with cyclin D1-positive cancers had up to a eightfold increased risk of poor outcome relative to those with cyclin D1-negative tumors. However, within the HPV-negative group, there was only a very small adjusted increased risk. A combination of pRb and HPV did not provide additional prognostic information. Our data provide the first evidence that a combination of HPV and cyclin D1 provides more prognostic information in oropharyngeal cancer than HPV alone. If findings are confirmed, treatment based on HPV and cyclin D1 may improve outcomes.

Lymph node ratio as an independent prognostic factor in oral squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to validate the lymph node ratio (LNR) as an independent prognostic factor in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and compare its utility with the current nodal staging system. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 313 patients with OSCC undergoing neck dissection. The LNR was adjusted by relevant covariates in a multivariable Cox regression model. RESULTS: LNR displaced conventional nodal staging and was shown to be an independent predictor of regional failure (p = .020), disease-specific (p = .003) and overall survival (p = .001). Patients with an LNR of 2.5% to 7.5%, 7.5% to 20%, and >20% had 2.6, 3.7, and 4.4 times the risk of death from OSCC, respectively, when compared with patients with an LNR <2.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The LNR is an independent prognostic factor in OSCC and may be used in conjunction with the current TNM staging to enable better risk stratification and selection for adjuvant therapy.