Very accelerated radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy for N3 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: Pooled analysis of two GORTEC randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcome of N3 patients treated with very accelerated radiotherapy (VART) or different schedules of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) within two phase III trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of 179 patients with N3 HNSCC from two GORTEC randomized trials (96-01 and 99-02) were pooled. Patients received either VART: 64.8Gy/3.5weeks or one of the 3 following CRT regimens: Conventional CRT: 70Gy/7weeks+3 cycles carboplatin-5FU; Moderately accelerated CRT: 70Gy/6weeks+2 cycles carboplatin-5FU; Strongly intensified CRT: 64Gy/5weeks+cisplatin (days 2, 16, 30) and 5 FU (days 1-5, 29-33) followed by 2 cycles adjuvant cisplatin-5FU. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 13.3 and 5.2years for GORTEC 96-01 and GORTEC 99-02, respectively. Five-year overall survival (OS) was 13.8%. No significant difference was observed between CRT versus VART in terms of OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.93, p=0.68), loco-regional progression (HR: 0.70, p=0.13), or distant progression (HR: 0.86, p=0.53). OS was worse for patients with T3-4 tumors versus early T stage (11.0% versus 25.7%, p=0.015). In multivariate analysis, the oropharyngeal subsite presented a higher risk of distant metastasis (as first event 46.5% vs 19.2%, p<0.001),). A significant interaction between treatment modalities and subsites has been observed concerning loco-regional and distant failures. CONCLUSION: The outcome of N3 HNSCC was extremely poor despite treatment intensification and no difference between CRT and VART. Both distant metastases and loco-regional failures remain important treatment challenge.

A New Prediction Model for Patient Satisfaction After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a proven and cost-effective treatment for osteoarthritis. Despite the good to excellent long-term results, some patients remain dissatisfied. Our study aimed at establishing a predictive model to aid patient selection and decision-making in TKA. METHODS: Using data from our prospective arthroplasty outcome database, 113 patients were included. Preoperatively and postoperatively, the patients completed 107 questions in 5 questionnaires: Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Oxford Knee Score, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Euroqol questionnaire, and Knee Scoring System. First, outcome parameters were compared between the satisfied and dissatisfied group. Second, we developed a new prediction tool using regression analysis. Each outcome score was analyzed with simple regression. Subsequently, the predictive weight of individual questions was evaluated applying multiple linear regression. Finally, 10 questions were retained to construct a new prediction tool. RESULTS: Overall satisfaction rate in this study was found to be 88%. We identified a significant difference between the satisfied and dissatisfied group when looking at the preoperative questionnaires. Dissatisfied patients had more preoperative symptoms (such as stiffness), less pain, and a lower quality of life. They were more likely to ruminate and had a lower preoperative Knee Scoring System satisfaction score. The developed prediction tool consists of 10 simple but robust questions. Sensitivity was 97% with a positive-predictive value of 93%. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon preoperative parameters, we were able to partially predict satisfaction and dissatisfaction after TKA. After further validation, this new prediction tool for patient satisfaction following TKA may allow surgeons and patients to evaluate the risks and benefits of surgery on an individual basis and help in patient selection.

Total knee arthroplasty at 15-17 years: does implant design affect outcome?

PURPOSE: A study was conducted to compare minimum 15-year survivorship and outcome of the Genesis I and II implants for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 245 consecutive TKA implanted between January 1995 and October 1997. Genesis I was implanted in 156 knees and Genesis II in 89 knees. RESULTS: At 15-17 years, 75 patients (31%) had died, 28 patients (11%) were lost to follow-up and 11 TKA were revised (4.6%), including ten Genesis I (6.4%) and one Genesis II (1.1%); 131 TKA (53%) were available for follow-up. Cumulative survivorship was 92.4% at 15.7 years. Survival in patients <69 years at surgery was lower (88.0%) compared with patients ≥69 years (98.5%; p = 0.023). In patients <69 years, Genesis I survival (84.3%) was worse compared with Genesis II (97.1%) (p = 0.018). Polyethylene (PE) Insert thickness ≤11 mm had significantly better survivorship (97.1%) compared with PE >11 mm (56.7%) (p < 0.0001) CONCLUSIONS: At a minimum of 15 years, the overall (92.4%) survivorship of Genesis TKA was good, with excellent (98.1%) survivorship of the Genesis II design. Revision rates were higher with Genesis I in the younger age group and with insert thickness >11 mm, possibly due to longer shelf life of less frequently used sizes.