A phase 1 study of concurrent cabozantinib and cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition with cetuximab is a standard treatment for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Activation of the receptor tyrosine kinases AXL, MET and VEGFR can mediate resistance to cetuximab. Cabozantinib, a multikinase inhibitor (MKI) targeting AXL/MET/VEGFR, has demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models of HNSCC. This investigator- initiated phase I trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of cetuximab plus cabozantinib in patients with recurrent/metastatic (R/M) HNSCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received cetuximab concurrently with cabozantinib daily on a 28-day cycle. Using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, the primary endpoint was to determine the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of cabozantinib. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) RESULTS: Among the 20 patients enrolled, most had prior disease progression on immune checkpoint inhibitors (95 %), platinum-based chemotherapy (95 %), and cetuximab (80 %). No dose-limiting toxicities were recorded and the MTD for cabozantinib was established to be 60 mg. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 65 % of patients (n = 13). ORR was 20 %, with 4 partial responses (PRs). Two PRs were observed in cetuximab-naïve patients (n = 4), with an ORR of 50 % in this subgroup. In the overall population, DCR was 75 %, median PFS was 3.4 months and median OS was 8.1 months. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab plus cabozantinib demonstrated a manageable toxicity profile and preliminary efficacy in patients with heavily treated R/M HNSCC. The combination of cetuximab with MKIs targeting the AXL/MET/VEGFR axis warrants further investigation, including in cetuximab-naïve patients.

Effect of time-of-day nivolumab and stereotactic body radiotherapy in metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: A secondary analysis of a prospective randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Prior work documented circadian rhythm impacts on efficacy and toxicity of cancer therapies. METHODS: Secondary analysis of prospective, phase II trial of metastatic HNSCC randomized to nivolumab+/-SBRT. Used cutoffs of 1100 and 1630. Timing classified by first infusion or majority of SBRT (e.g., PM SBRT defined by two or three fractions after 1630). RESULTS: Of 62 patients, there was no significant difference in median PFS between AM nivolumab (n = 7, 175 days), PM nivolumab (n = 21, 58 days), or Mid-Day nivolumab (n = 34, 67 days; p = 0.8). There was no significant difference in median PFS with AM SBRT (n = 4, 78 days), PM SBRT (n = 13, 111 days), or Mid-Day SBRT (n = 15, 63 days; p = 0.8). There was no significant difference in Grade 3-4 toxicity or ORR. Sensitivity analyses with other timepoints were negative. CONCLUSIONS: Further work may elucidate circadian impacts on select patients, tumors, and therapies; however, we found no significant effect in this study.

An Analysis of Positron Emission Tomography Maximum Standard Uptake Value Among Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Receiving Photon and Proton Radiation.

PURPOSE: One main advantage of proton therapy versus photon therapy is its precise radiation delivery to targets without exit dose, resulting in lower dose to surrounding healthy tissues. This is critical, given the proximity of head and neck tumors to normal structures. However, proton planning requires careful consideration of factors, including air-tissue interface, anatomic uncertainties, surgical artifacts, weight fluctuations, rapid tumor response, and daily variations in setup and anatomy, as these heterogeneities can lead to inaccuracies in targeting and creating unwarranted hotspots to a greater extent than photon radiation. In addition, the elevated relative biological effectiveness at the Bragg peak's distal end can also increase hot spots within and outside the target area. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate for a difference in positron emission tomography (PET) standard uptake value (SUV) after definitive treatment, between intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and intensity modulated photon therapy (IMRT). In addition, we compared the biologic dose between PET areas of high and low uptake within the clinical target volume-primary of patients treated with IMPT. This work is assuming that the greater SUV may potentially result in greater toxicities. For the purposes of this short communication, we are strictly focusing on the SUV and do not have correlation with toxicity outcomes. To accomplish this, we compared the 3- and 6-month posttreatment fluorodeoxyglucose PET scans for 100 matched patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated definitively without surgery using either IMPT (n = 50) or IMRT (n = 50). RESULTS: Our study found a significant difference in biologic dose between the high- and low-uptake regions on 3-month posttreatment scans of IMPT. However, this difference did not translate to a significant difference in PET uptake in the clinical target volume-primary at 3 and 6 months' follow-up between patients who received IMPT versus IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: Studies have proposed that proton's greater relative biological effectiveness at the Bragg peak could lead to tissue inflammation. Our study did not corroborate these findings. This study's conclusion underscores the need for further investigations with ultimate correlation with clinical toxicity outcomes.

Hypoxia-Directed Treatment of Human Papillomavirus-Related Oropharyngeal Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Standard curative-intent chemoradiotherapy for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal carcinoma results in significant toxicity. Since hypoxic tumors are radioresistant, we posited that the aerobic state of a tumor could identify patients eligible for de-escalation of chemoradiotherapy while maintaining treatment efficacy. METHODS: We enrolled patients with HPV-related oropharyngeal carcinoma to receive de-escalated definitive chemoradiotherapy in a phase II study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03323463). Patients first underwent surgical removal of disease at their primary site, but not of gross disease in the neck. A baseline 18F-fluoromisonidazole positron emission tomography scan was used to measure tumor hypoxia and was repeated 1-2 weeks intratreatment. Patients with nonhypoxic tumors received 30 Gy (3 weeks) with chemotherapy, whereas those with hypoxic tumors received standard chemoradiotherapy to 70 Gy (7 weeks). The primary objective was achieving a 2-year locoregional control (LRC) of 95% with a 7% noninferiority margin. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-eight patients with T0-2/N1-N2c were enrolled, of which 152 patients were eligible for analyses. Of these, 128 patients met criteria for 30 Gy and 24 patients received 70 Gy. The 2-year LRC was 94.7% (95% CI, 89.8 to 97.7), meeting our primary objective. With a median follow-up time of 38.3 (range, 22.1-58.4) months, the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 94% and 100%, respectively, for the 30-Gy cohort. The 70-Gy cohort had similar 2-year PFS and OS rates at 96% and 96%, respectively. Acute grade 3-4 adverse events were more common in 70 Gy versus 30 Gy (58.3% v 32%; P = .02). Late grade 3-4 adverse events only occurred in the 70-Gy cohort, in which 4.5% complained of late dysphagia. CONCLUSION: Tumor hypoxia is a promising approach to direct dosing of curative-intent chemoradiotherapy for HPV-related carcinomas with preserved efficacy and substantially reduced toxicity that requires further investigation.

Phase 3 Trial of Selpercatinib in Advanced RET-Mutant Medullary Thyroid Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib, a highly selective, potent RET inhibitor, has shown efficacy in advanced RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer in a phase 1-2 trial, but its efficacy as compared with approved multikinase inhibitors is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized trial comparing selpercatinib as first-line therapy with the physician's choice of cabozantinib or vandetanib (control group). Eligible patients had progressive disease documented within 14 months before enrollment. The primary end point in the protocol-specified interim efficacy analysis was progression-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review. Crossover to selpercatinib was permitted among patients in the control group after disease progression. Treatment failure-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review, was a secondary, alpha-controlled end point that was to be tested only if progression-free survival was significant. Among the other secondary end points were overall response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 291 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 12 months, median progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2 to 25.1) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.48; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 12 months was 86.8% (95% CI, 79.8 to 91.6) in the selpercatinib group and 65.7% (95% CI, 51.9 to 76.4) in the control group. Median treatment failure-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 13.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events, or death, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.42; P<0.001). Treatment failure-free survival at 12 months was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.1 to 91.0) in the selpercatinib group and 62.1% (95% CI, 48.9 to 72.8) in the control group. The overall response was 69.4% (95% CI, 62.4 to 75.8) in the selpercatinib group and 38.8% (95% CI, 29.1 to 49.2) in the control group. Adverse events led to a dose reduction in 38.9% of the patients in the selpercatinib group, as compared with 77.3% in the control group, and to treatment discontinuation in 4.7% and 26.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib treatment resulted in superior progression-free survival and treatment failure-free survival as compared with cabozantinib or vandetanib in patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer. (Funded by Loxo Oncology, a subsidiary of Eli Lilly; LIBRETTO-531 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04211337.).

RET-Altered Cancers-A Tumor-Agnostic Review of Biology, Diagnosis and Targeted Therapy Activity.

RET alterations, such as fusions or mutations, drive the growth of multiple tumor types. These alterations are found in canonical (lung and thyroid) and non-canonical (e.g., gastrointestinal, breast, gynecological, genitourinary, histiocytic) cancers. RET alterations are best identified via comprehensive next-generation sequencing, preferably with DNA and RNA interrogation for fusions. Targeted therapies for RET-dependent cancers have evolved from older multikinase inhibitors to selective inhibitors of RET such as selpercatinib and pralsetinib. Prospective basket trials and retrospective reports have demonstrated the activity of these drugs in a wide variety of RET-altered cancers, notably those with RET fusions. This paved the way for the first tumor-agnostic selective RET inhibitor US FDA approval in 2022. Acquired resistance to RET kinase inhibitors can take the form of acquired resistance mutations (e.g., RET G810X) or bypass alterations.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced salivary gland cancer: a phase 2 trial.

Salivary gland cancers (SGCs) are rare, aggressive cancers without effective treatments when metastasized. We conducted a phase 2 trial evaluating nivolumab (nivo, anti-PD-1) and ipilimumab (ipi, anti-CTLA-4) in 64 patients with metastatic SGC enrolled in two histology-based cohorts (32 patients each): adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC; cohort 1) and other SGCs (cohort 2). The primary efficacy endpoint (≥4 objective responses) was met in cohort 2 (5/32, 16%) but not in cohort 1 (2/32, 6%). Treatment safety/tolerability and progression-free survival (PFS) were secondary endpoints. Treatment-related adverse events grade ≥3 occurred in 24 of 64 (38%) patients across both cohorts, and median PFS was 4.4 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.4, 8.3) and 2.2 months (95% CI: 1.8, 5.3) for cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. We present whole-exome, RNA and T cell receptor (TCR) sequencing data from pre-treatment and on-treatment tumors and immune cell flow cytometry and TCR sequencing from peripheral blood at serial timepoints. Responding tumors universally demonstrated clonal expansion of pre-existing T cells and mutational contraction. Responding ACCs harbored neoantigens, including fusion-derived neoepitopes, that induced T cell responses ex vivo. This study shows that nivo+ipi has limited efficacy in ACC, albeit with infrequent, exceptional responses, and that it could be promising for non-ACC SGCs, particularly salivary duct carcinomas. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03172624 .

Concurrent carboplatin and paclitaxel definitive radiation therapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: We report the outcomes of cisplatin-ineligible HNSCC patients treated with definitive chemoradiation and concurrent carboplatin and paclitaxel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included consecutive HNSCC patients treated from 2013 to 2021 that received definitive chemoradiation with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Locoregional recurrences (LRR) and distant metastases (DM) were estimated using cumulative incidence functions. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were identified with median age of 71 years (range 44-85). Median radiation dose was 70 Gy and the median doses of carboplatin and paclitaxel were AUC 1 and 40 mg/m2 , respectively. At a median follow-up of 29 (range 5-91) months, the 2-year rates of LRR, DM, PFS, and OS were 8.8%, 9.4%, 72.2%, and 88.7%, respectively. In total, there were 5 LRR, 7 DM, and 12 deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Chemoradiation with carboplatin and paclitaxel is an excellent option for cisplatin-ineligible HNSCC patients.

Post-operative PET/CT improves the detection of early recurrence of squamous cell carcinomas of the oral cavity.

BACKGROUND: We evaluate the impact of post-operative 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography (PET/CT) for radiation planning on the detection of early recurrence (ER) and treatment outcomes in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients treated with post-operative radiation between 2005 and 2019 for OSCC at our institution. Extracapsular extension and positive surgical margins were classified as high risk features; pT3-4, node positivity, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, tumor thickness >5 mm, and close surgical margins were considered intermediate risk features. Patients with ER were identified. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances between baseline characteristics. RESULTS: 391 patients with OSCC were treated with post-operative radiation. 237 (60.6%) patients underwent post-operative PET/CT planning vs. 154 (39.4%) who were planned with CT only. Patients screened with post-operative PET/CT were more likely to be diagnosed with ER than those planned with CT only (16.5 vs. 3.3%, p < 0.0001). Among patients with ER, those with intermediate features were more likely than those high risk features to undergo major treatment intensification, including re-operation, the addition of chemotherapy, or intensification of radiation by ≥ 10 Gy (91% vs. 9%, p < 0.0001). Post-operative PET/CT was associated with improved disease-free and overall survival for patients with intermediate risk features (IPTW log-rank p = 0.026 and p = 0.047, respectively) but not high risk features (IPTW log-rank p = 0.44 and p = 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Use of post-operative PET/CT is associated with increased detection of early recurrence. Among patients with intermediate risk features, this may translate to improved disease-free survival.

Evaluation of Proton Therapy Reirradiation for Patients With Recurrent Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Importance: Use of proton therapy reirradiation (PT-ReRT) for head and neck cancer is increasing; however, reports are heterogenous and outcomes can be difficult to interpret. Objective: To evaluate outcomes and toxic effects following PT-ReRT in a uniform and consecutive cohort of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients with recurrent primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who were treated with PT-ReRT from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020, at a single institution. Patient, clinical, and treatment characteristics were obtained, and multidisciplinary review was performed to record and grade early and late toxic effects. Exposures: Proton therapy reirradiation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Follow-up was defined from the start of PT-ReRT. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for outcomes of interest, including local control (LC), locoregional control, distant metastatic control, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to assess associations of covariates with OS. Results: A total of 242 patients (median [range] age, 63 [21-96] years; 183 [75.6%] male) were included. Of these patients, 231 (95.9%) had a Karnofsky performance status score of 70 or higher, and 145 (59.9%) had at least a 10-pack-year smoking history. Median (range) follow-up was 12.0 (5.8-26.0) months for all patients and 24.5 (13.8-37.8) months for living patients. A total of 206 patients (85.1%) had recurrent disease vs second primary or residual disease. The median (range) interval between radiation courses was 22 (1-669) months. Median PT-ReRT dose was 70 cobalt gray equivalents (CGE) for the fractionated cohort and 44.4 CGE for the quad shot cohort. For the fractionated cohort, the 1-year LC was 71.8% (95% CI, 62.8%-79.0%) and the 1-year OS was 66.6% (95% CI, 58.1%-73.8%). For the quad shot cohort, the 1-year LC was 61.6% (95% CI, 46.4%-73.6%) and the 1-year OS was 28.5% (95% CI, 19.4%-38.3%). Higher Karnofsky performance status scores (hazard ratio [HR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-0.99; P = .046) and receipt of salvage surgery prior to PT-ReRT (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.84; P = .005) were associated with improved OS, whereas receipt of quad shot (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.36-2.86; P < .001) was associated with worse OS. There were a total of 73 grade 3 and 6 grade 4 early toxic effects. There were 79 potential grade 3, 4 grade 4, and 5 grade 5 late toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that, compared with previous reports with photon-based reirradiation, patients are living longer with aggressive PT-ReRT; however, surviving patients remain at risk of early and late complications.

Radiotherapy and paclitaxel plus pazopanib or placebo in anaplastic thyroid cancer (NRG/RTOG 0912): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Anaplastic thyroid cancer is a rare and aggressive cancer with no standard radiotherapy-based local treatment. Based on data suggesting synergy between pazopanib and paclitaxel in anaplastic thyroid cancer, NRG Oncology did a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 2 clinical trial comparing concurrent paclitaxel and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with the addition of pazopanib or placebo with the aim of improving overall survival in this patient population. METHODS: Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with a pathological diagnosis of anaplastic thyroid cancer, any TNM stage, Zubrod performance status of 0-2, no recent haemoptysis or bleeding, and no brain metastases. Patients were enrolled from 34 centres in the USA. Initially, a run-in was done to establish safety. In the randomised phase 2 trial, patients in the experimental group (pazopanib) received 2-3 weeks of weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) intravenously and daily pazopanib suspension 400 mg orally followed by concurrent weekly paclitaxel (50 mg/m2), daily pazopanib (300 mg), and IMRT 66 Gy given in 33 daily fractions (2 Gy fractions). In the control group (placebo), pazopanib was replaced by matching placebo. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the two treatment groups by permuted block randomisation by NRG Oncology with stratification by metastatic disease. All investigators, patients, and funders of the study were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01236547, and is complete. FINDINGS: The safety run-showed the final dosing regimen to be safe based on two out of nine participants having adverse events of predefined concern. Between June 23, 2014, and Dec 30, 2016, 89 patients were enrolled to the phase 2 trial, of whom 71 were eligible (36 in the pazopanib group and 35 in the placebo group; 34 [48%] males and 37 [52%] females). At the final analysis (data cutoff March 9, 2020), with a median follow-up of 2·9 years (IQR 0·002-4·0), 61 patients had died. Overall survival was not significantly improved with pazopanib versus placebo, with a median overall survival of 5·7 months (95% CI 4·0-12·8) in the pazopanib group versus 7·3 months (4·3-10·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·52-1·43; one-sided log-rank p=0·28). 1-year overall survival was 37·1% (95% CI 21·1-53·2) in the pazopanib group and 29·0% (13·2-44·8) in the placebo group. The incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (pazopanib 88·9% [32 of 36 patients] and placebo 85·3% [29 of 34 patients]; p=0·73). The most common clinically significant grade 3-4 adverse events in the 70 eligible treated patients (36 in the pazopanib group and 34 in the placebo group) were dysphagia (13 [36%] vs 10 [29%]), radiation dermatitis (8 [22%] vs 13 [38%]), increased alanine aminotransferase (12 [33%] vs none), increased aspartate aminotransferase (eight [22%] vs none), and oral mucositis (five [14%] vs eight [24%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported for 16 (44%) patients on pazopanib and 12 (35%) patients on placebo. The most common serious adverse events were dehydration and thromboembolic event (three [8%] each) in patients on pazopanib and oral mucositis (three [8%]) in those on placebo. There was one treatment-related death in each group (sepsis in the pazopanib group and pneumonitis in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this study is the largest randomised anaplastic thyroid cancer study that has completed accrual showing feasibility in a multicenter NCI National Clinical Trials Network setting. Although no significant improvement in overall survival was recorded in the pazopanib group, the treatment combination was shown to be feasible and safe, and hypothesis-generating data that might warrant further investigation were generated. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute and Novartis.

Long-Term Update of NRG/RTOG 0522: A Randomized Phase 3 Trial of Concurrent Radiation and Cisplatin With or Without Cetuximab in Locoregionally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer.

PURPOSE: The combination of cisplatin and radiation or cetuximab and radiation improves overall survival of patients with locoregionally advanced head and neck carcinoma. NRG Oncology conducted a phase 3 trial to test the hypothesis that adding cetuximab to radiation and cisplatin would improve progression-free survival (PFS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer sixth edition stage T2 N2a-3 M0 or T3-4 N0-3 M0 were accrued from November 2005 to March 2009 and randomized to receive radiation and cisplatin without (arm A) or with (arm B) cetuximab. Outcomes were correlated with patient and tumor features. Late reactions were scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3). RESULTS: Of 891 analyzed patients, 452 with a median follow-up of 10.1 years were alive at analysis. The addition of cetuximab did not improve PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.26; P = .74), with 10-year estimates of 43.6% (95% CI, 38.8- 48.4) for arm A and 40.2% (95% CI, 35.4-45.0) for arm B. Cetuximab did not reduce locoregional failure (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.95-1.53; P = .94) or distant metastasis (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.54-1.14; P = .10) or improve overall survival (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80-1.16; P = .36). Cetuximab did not appear to improve PFS in either p16-positive oropharynx (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.87-1.93) or p16-negative oropharynx or nonoropharyngeal primary (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.73-1.21). Grade 3 to 4 late toxicity rates were 57.4% in arm A and 61.3% in arm B (P = .26). CONCLUSIONS: With a median follow-up of more than 10 years, this updated report confirms the addition of cetuximab to radiation therapy and cisplatin did not improve any measured outcome in the entire cohort or when stratifying by p16 status.

Consensuses, controversies, and future directions in treatment deintensification for human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer.

The most common cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in the United States is oropharyngeal cancer (OPC), and its incidence has been rising since the turn of the century. Because of substantial long-term morbidities with chemoradiation and the favorable prognosis of HPV-positive OPC, identifying the optimal deintensification strategy for this group has been a keystone of academic head-and-neck surgery, radiation oncology, and medical oncology for over the past decade. However, the first generation of randomized chemotherapy deintensification trials failed to change the standard of care, triggering concern over the feasibility of de-escalation. National database studies estimate that up to one third of patients receive nonstandard de-escalated treatments, which have subspecialty-specific nuances. A synthesis of the multidisciplinary deintensification data and current treatment standards is important for the oncology community to reinforce best practices and ensure optimal patient outcomes. In this review, the authors present a summary and comparison of prospective HPV-positive OPC de-escalation trials. Chemotherapy attenuation compromises outcomes without reducing toxicity. Limited data comparing transoral robotic surgery (TORS) with radiation raise concern over toxicity and outcomes with TORS. There are promising data to support de-escalating adjuvant therapy after TORS, but consensus on treatment indications is needed. Encouraging radiation deintensification strategies have been reported (upfront dose reduction and induction chemotherapy-based patient selection), but level I evidence is years away. Ultimately, stage and HPV status may be insufficient to guide de-escalation. The future of deintensification may lie in incorporating intratreatment response assessments to harness the powers of personalized medicine and integrate real-time surveillance.

Toxicity Profiles and Survival Outcomes Among Patients With Nonmetastatic Oropharyngeal Carcinoma Treated With Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy vs Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy.

Importance: Patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) treated with radiotherapy often experience substantial toxic effects, even with modern techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) has a potential advantage over IMRT due to reduced dose to the surrounding organs at risk; however, data are scarce given the limited availability and use of IMPT. Objective: To compare toxic effects and oncologic outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic OPC treated with IMPT vs IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic OPC who received curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT at a single-institution tertiary academic cancer center from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021, with follow-up through December 31, 2021. Exposures: IMPT or IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the incidence of acute and chronic (present after ≥6 months) treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and oncologic outcomes, including locoregional recurrence (LRR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Fisher exact tests and χ2 tests were used to evaluate associations between toxic effects and treatment modality (IMPT vs IMRT), and the Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare LRR, PFS, and OS between the 2 groups. Results: The study included 292 patients with OPC (272 [93%] with human papillomavirus [HPV]-p16-positive tumors); 254 (87%) were men, 38 (13%) were women, and the median age was 64 years (IQR, 58-71 years). Fifty-eight patients (20%) were treated with IMPT, and 234 (80%) were treated with IMRT. Median follow-up was 26 months (IQR, 17-36 months). Most patients (283 [97%]) received a dose to the primary tumor of 70 Gy. Fifty-seven of the patients treated with IMPT (98%) and 215 of those treated with IMRT (92%) had HPV-p16-positive disease. There were no significant differences in 3-year OS (97% IMPT vs 91% IMRT; P = .18), PFS (82% IMPT vs 85% IMRT; P = .62), or LRR (5% IMPT vs 4% IMRT; P = .59). The incidence of acute toxic effects was significantly higher for IMRT compared with IMPT for oral pain of grade 2 or greater (42 [72%] IMPT vs 217 [93%] IMRT; P < .001), xerostomia of grade 2 or greater (12 [21%] IMPT vs 68 [29%] IMRT; P < .001), dysgeusia of grade 2 or greater (16 [28%] IMPT vs 134 [57%] IMRT; P < .001), grade 3 dysphagia (4 [7%] IMPT vs 29 [12%] IMRT; P < .001), mucositis of grade 3 or greater (10 [53%] IMPT vs 13 [70%] IMRT; P = .003), nausea of grade 2 or greater (0 [0%] IMPT vs 18 [8%] IMRT; P = .04), and weight loss of grade 2 or greater (22 [37%] IMPT vs 138 [59%] IMRT; P < .001). There were no significant differences in chronic toxic effects of grade 3 or greater, although there was a significant difference for chronic xerostomia of grade 2 or greater (6 IMPT [11%] vs 22 IMRT [10%]; P < .001). Four patients receiving IMRT (2%) vs 0 receiving IMPT had a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube for longer than 6 months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT for nonmetastatic OPC was associated with a significantly reduced acute toxicity burden compared with IMRT, with few chronic toxic effects and favorable oncologic outcomes, including locoregional recurrence of only 5% at 2 years. Prospective randomized clinical trials comparing these 2 technologies and of patient-reported outcomes are warranted.

American Head and Neck Society Endocrine Surgery Section and International Thyroid Oncology Group consensus statement on mutational testing in thyroid cancer: Defining advanced thyroid cancer and its targeted treatment.

BACKGROUND: The development of systemic treatment options leveraging the molecular landscape of advanced thyroid cancer is a burgeoning field. This is a multidisciplinary evidence-based statement on the definition of advanced thyroid cancer and its targeted systemic treatment. METHODS: An expert panel was assembled, a literature review was conducted, and best practice statements were developed. The modified Delphi method was applied to assess the degree of consensus for the statements developed by the author panel. RESULTS: A review of the current understanding of thyroid oncogenesis at a molecular level is presented and characteristics of advanced thyroid cancer are defined. Twenty statements in topics including the multidisciplinary management, molecular evaluation, and targeted systemic treatment of advanced thyroid cancer are provided. CONCLUSIONS: With the growth in targeted treatment options for thyroid cancer, a consensus definition of advanced disease and statements regarding the utility of molecular testing and available targeted systemic therapy is warranted.