Association of human papillomavirus genotype and phylogenic clade with oropharyngeal cancer outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV)+ oropharynx cancer (OPC) has a more favorable prognosis than HPV-negative disease, but the impact of specific HPV genotype and phylogenic clade on patient outcomes is not well understood and has profound implications for treatment de-intensification. METHODS: The objective of this single-institution cohort study was to investigate the association of HPV genotype (16 vs high-risk non-16) and clade (A9 vs A7) with OPC outcomes. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) in patients with M0 disease treated with curative intent. RESULTS: The cohort included 598 patients (87% HPV16, 98% A9). Compared to those with HPV16 OPC, individuals with non-HPV16 OPC had a higher age, comorbidity index, and proportion of non-whites, HIV+ patients, T4 tumors, and stage IV disease (AJCC 7th edition). Non-HPV16 genotype was associated with worse OS in univariate (HR = 2.17, 95% CI, 1.24-3.80, P = .0066), but not in multivariate analysis (HRadj = 0.84, 95% CI, 0.43-1.62, P = .5921). A7 clade was associated with worse OS in univariate (HR = 4.42, 95% CI, 1.60-12.30, P = .0041), but not in multivariate analysis (HRadj = 2.39, 95% CI, 0.57-9.99, P = .2325). Neither HPV genotype (HR = 1.60, 95% CI, 0.99-2.60, P = .0566) nor phylogenic clade (HR = 2.47, 95% CI, 0.91-6.72, P = .0761) was associated with EFS. CONCLUSION: Non-HPV16 genotype and A7 clade were associated with worse OS and trended toward worse EFS in univariate analyses. The survival differences were more pronounced by phylogenic clade than by HPV16 status, suggesting that the former may be a more useful classification for future studies. However, neither HPV16 status nor phylogenic clade was prognostic when adjusting for patient and tumor covariates, raising the question as to whether possible differences in outcomes are related to distinct clinical profiles rather than inherent viral properties.

Minimally Invasive Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Ankylosis and Fibrosis of Temporalis Muscle.

A case of severe mandibular hypomobility due to fibrosis of the left temporalis tendon, combined with ankylosis of the temporomandibular joint, is presented. This case emphasizes the importance of reconstructing the historical timeline to establish a correct diagnosis, ultimately leading to appropriate treatment. The use of minimally invasive surgical techniques and the importance of postoperative rehabilitation are emphasized.

Systemic Anticancer Therapy and Thromboembolic Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients With Cancer and COVID-19.

Importance: Systematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking. Objective: To assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022. Exposure: Treatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up. Results: Of 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19-related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.