Smoking and other patient factors in HPV-mediated oropharynx cancer: A retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To characterize the significance of patient-level influences, including smoking history, on oncologic outcomes in human papillomavirus (HPV)-mediated oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bi-institutional retrospective cohort study of previously untreated, HPV+ OPC patients who underwent curative treatment from 1/1/2008 to 7/1/2018 was performed. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS) and the primary exposure was ≤10 versus >10-pack-year (PY)-smoking history. RESULTS: Among 953 OPC patients identified, 342 individuals with HPV+ OPC were included. The median patient age was 62 years, 33.0% had a > 10-PY-smoking history, 60.2% had AJCC8 stage I disease, and 35.0% underwent primary surgery. The median follow-up was 49 months (interquartile range [IQR] 32-75 months). Four-year DFS-estimates were similar among patients with ≤10-PY-smoking history (78.0%, 95% CI:71.7%-83.1%) compared to >10-PYs (74.8%; 95% CI:65.2%-82.0%; log-rank:p = 0.53). On univariate analysis, >10-PY-smoking history did not correlate with DFS (hazard ratio[HR]:1.15;95% CI:0.74-1.79) and remained nonsignificant when forced into the multivariable model. On adjusted analyses, stage, treatment paradigm, and age predicted DFS. Neither >10-PYs, nor any other definition of tobacco use (e.g., current smoker or > 20-PYs) was predictive of DFS, overall survival, or disease-specific survival. Conversely, age nonsignificantly and significantly predicted adjusted DFS (adjusted HR[aHR]:1.02,95% CI:0.997-1.05, p = 0.08), overall survival (aHR 1.05; 95% CI: 1.02-1.08; p = 0.002) and disease-specific survival (aHR 1.04;95% CI: 0.99-1.09;p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Other than age, patient-level influences may not be primary drivers of HPV+ OPC outcomes. Although limited by its modest sample size, our study suggests the significance of smoking has been overstated in this disease. These findings and the emerging literature collectively do not support risk-stratification employing the >10-PY threshold. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.

Supportive Care Needs Among Head and Neck Cancer Patients Prior to Oncologic Treatment: A Prospective, Nested Cross-Sectional Qualitative Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To qualitatively characterize pretreatment head and neck cancer (HNC) patients' supportive care (SC) needs, attitudes toward SC, and barriers to SC utilization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, nested, bi-institutional, cross-sectional pilot study design was employed. Participants were sub-selected from a representative sample of 50 patients newly diagnosed with mucosal or salivary gland HNC or sarcoma of the head and neck. Eligibility criteria included reporting ≥2 unmet needs (according to the Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form 34) or clinically-significant distress (National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer score ≥4). Semi-structured interviews were performed prior to initiation of oncologic treatment. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed using NVivo 12.0 (QSR Australia). Thematic findings and representative quotes were interpreted by the entire research team. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were interviewed. One-third were treated at the county safety-net hospital and the remainder were treated at the university health system. An equal proportion of patients presented with oral cavity, oropharyngeal, and laryngeal or other tumors. Two significant findings were identified on semi-structured interviews. First, patients did not perceive the relevance of SC prior to treatment. Second, anxiety surrounding the HNC diagnosis and impending treatment dominated in the pretreatment phase. CONCLUSION: Improved HNC patient education about the relevance and importance of SC in the pretreatment setting is needed. Integration of social work or psychological services in HNC clinics is warranted to address patients' cancer-related worry-a discrete, dominant pretreatment SC need.