Assessment of the Dosimetric Index from IMRT and Rapid arc Plan for Oropharyngeal Cancer with Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) Technique in Combination with EUD-based NTCP and TCP Radiobiological Models.

PURPOSE: The current research compared radiobiological and dosimetric results for simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plans employing RapidArc and IMRT planning procedures in oropharyngeal cancer from head-and-neck cancer (HNC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The indigenously developed Python-based software was used in this study for generation and analysis. Twelve patients with forty-eight total plans with SIB were planned using Rapid arc (2 and 3 arcs) and IMRT (7 and 9 fields) and compared with radiobiological models Lyman, Kutcher, Burman (LKB) and EUD (Equivalent Uniform Dose) along with physical index such as homogeneity index(HI), conformity index(CI) of target volumes. RESULTS: These models' inputs are the dose-volume histograms (DVHs) calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS). The values obtained vary from one model to the other for the same technique and patient. The maximum dose to the brainstem and spinal cord and the mean dose to the parotids were analysed both dosimetrically and radiobiologically, such as the LKB model effective volume, equivalent uniform dose, EUD-based normal tissue complication probability, and normal tissue integral dose. The mean and max dose to target volume with conformity, homogeneity index, tumor control probability compared with treatment times, and monitor units. CONCLUSION: Rapid arc (3 arcs) resulted in significantly better OAR sparing, dose homogeneity, and conformity. The findings indicate that the rapid arc plan has improved dose distribution in the target volume compared with IMRT, but the tumor control probability obtained for the two planning methods, Rapid arc (3 arcs) and IMRT (7 fields), are similar. The treatment time and monitor units for the Rapid arc (3 arcs) were superior to other planning methods and considered to be standard in head & neck radiotherapy.

Conventional Therapies of Oral Cancers: Highlights on Chemotherapeutic Agents and Radiotherapy, Their Adverse Effects, and the Cost Burden of Conventional Therapies.

Oral cancer (OC) is increasing worldwide, and it is mostly present to clinic in the late-stage of disease. Cancer of the lips, tongue, hard palate, upper and lower gingiva, buccal mucosa, and retromolar trigone are all included in the category of oral cavity cancer. Disease symptomatology and pathological grading decides the course of treatment. Several treatment modalities either alone in combinations may be utilized for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), including surgery, radiotherapy (external beam radiotherapy/brachytherapy), and adjuvant systemic therapy (chemotherapy or immunotherapy). Cancer patients also face a greater risk of oral side effects from chemotherapy, such as slowed tissue healing, bone, and salivary gland damage and disintegration, and disruption of the normal bacterial balance in the mouth. Consequently, the economic burden of the salivary gland, oral cavity, and oropharyngeal cancers must be also known for budget allocation, designing different programs and management strategies targeting oral cancers by any healthcare institutes. This article provides a summary of the most recent research that supports the use of chemotherapy for patients with advanced illness both alone and in conjunction with radiation including its adverse events and cost burden for oral cancers.

Patient-Reported Financial Toxicity in a Population-Based Cohort of Oropharynx Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: Patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) are at high risk for financial toxicity (FT), but the nature, extent, and predictors of FT experienced after primary radiation therapy (RT) or surgery are poorly understood. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used a population-based sample of patients from the Texas Cancer Registry with stage I to III OPSCC diagnosed from 2006 to 2016 and treated with primary RT or surgery. Of 1,668 eligible patients, 1,600 were sampled, 400 responded, and 396 confirmed OPSCC. Measures included the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Head and Neck, Neck Dissection Impairment Index, and a financial toxicity instrument adapted from the Individualized Cancer Care (iCanCare) study. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations of exposures with outcomes. RESULTS: Of 396 analyzable respondents, 269 (68%) received primary RT and 127 (32%) surgery. The median time from diagnosis to survey was 7 years. Due to OPSCC, 54% of patients experienced material sacrifice (including 28% who reduced food spending and 6% who lost their housing), 45% worried about financial problems, and 29% experienced long-term FT. Independent factors associated with more long-term FT included female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-2.40), Black non-Hispanic race (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.26-7.09), unmarried status (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.11-2.03), feeding tube use (OR, 3.98; 95% CI, 2.29-6.90), and worst versus best quartile on the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Head and Neck (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.23-2.90) and Neck Dissection Impairment Index (OR, 5.62; 95% CI, 3.79-8.34). Factors associated with less long-term FT included age >57 years (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.71; P < .001) and household income ≥$80,000 (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.44-0.82; P = .001). Primary RT versus surgery was not associated with long-term FT (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: Oropharynx cancer survivors experience high rates of material sacrifice and long-term FT, and we identified important risk factors. Chronic symptom burden was associated with significantly worse long-term financial status, supporting the hypothesis that toxicity mitigation strategies may reduce long-term FT.

Cost-effectiveness of concurrent radiation with cetuximab or chemotherapy in older patients with oropharyngeal cancer.

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of definitive therapies for nonmetastatic oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Materials & methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset, patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 were identified. The cost-effectiveness of chemoradiation (CRT) versus radiotherapy (RT), cetuximab plus RT (cetuximab-RT) versus RT and cetuximab-RT versus CRT were estimated. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CRT compared with RT from 2000 to 2005 was US$56,650 (95% CI: US$4,522-$288,688) per additional year of survival. CRT was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. Cetuximab-RT was dominated by RT and CRT. Conclusion: CRT had a favorable value from 2000 to 2005 but was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. The value of cetuximab-RT compared with RT/CRT was not favorable with similar/inferior survival and substantial incremental costs.

Assessment of Toxic Effects and Survival in Treatment Deescalation With Radiotherapy vs Transoral Surgery for HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The ORATOR2 Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The optimal approach for treatment deescalation in human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCCs) is unknown. Objective: To assess a primary radiotherapy (RT) approach vs a primary transoral surgical (TOS) approach in treatment deescalation for HPV-related OPSCC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, multicenter, open-label parallel-group phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted at 9 tertiary academic cancer centers in Canada and Australia and enrolled patients with T1-T2N0-2 p16-positive OPSCC between February 13, 2018, and November 17, 2020. Patients had up to 3 years of follow-up. Interventions: Primary RT (consisting of 60 Gy of RT with concurrent weekly cisplatin in node-positive patients) vs TOS and neck dissection (ND) (with adjuvant reduced-dose RT depending on pathologic findings). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival (OS) compared with a historical control. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life, and toxic effects. Results: Overall, 61 patients were randomized (30 [49.2%] in the RT arm and 31 [50.8%] in the TOS and ND arm; median [IQR] age, 61.9 [57.2-67.9] years; 8 women [13.6%] and 51 men [86.4%]; 31 [50.8%] never smoked). The trial began in February 2018, and accrual was halted in November 2020 because of excessive toxic effects in the TOS and ND arm. Median follow-up was 17 months (IQR, 15-20 months). For the OS end point, there were 3 death events, all in the TOS and ND arm, including the 2 treatment-related deaths (0.7 and 4.3 months after randomization, respectively) and 1 of myocardial infarction at 8.5 months. There were 4 events for the PFS end point, also all in the TOS and ND arm, which included the 3 mortality events and 1 local recurrence. Thus, the OS and PFS data remained immature. Grade 2 to 5 toxic effects occurred in 20 patients (67%) in the RT arm and 22 (71%) in the TOS and ND arm. Mean (SD) MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory scores at 1 year were similar between arms (85.7 [15.6] and 84.7 [14.5], respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, TOS was associated with an unacceptable risk of grade 5 toxic effects, but patients in both trial arms achieved good swallowing outcomes at 1 year. Long-term follow-up is required to assess OS and PFS outcomes. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03210103.

Should the HPV positive oropharyngeal cancer patient be considered for a two-stage dental assessment for their radiation treatment?

Patients due to commence head and neck radiation treatment are expected to undergo a dental assessment and be deemed 'dentally fit'. Though this intervention is welcomed by the dental fraternity it is not without its challenges especially in human papilloma virus (HPV) related oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) which has seen a phenomenal rise over the past decade. This perspective piece presents these challenges and proposes a potential adaption of the dental assessment for HPV OPC patients though not necessarily exclusive to this tumour sub-site.

Optimizing oropharyngeal cancer management by using proton beam therapy: trends of cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a new-emerging cancer treatment in China but its treatment costs are high and not yet covered by Chinese public medical insurance. The advanced form of PBT, intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT), has been confirmed to reduce normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) as compared to conventional intensity-modulated photon-radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Herein, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness and applicability of IMPT versus IMRT for OPC patients in China, aiming at guiding the proper use of PBT. METHODS: A 7-state Markov model was designed for analysis. Base-case evaluation was performed on a 56-year-old (median age of OPC in China) patient under the assumption that IMPT could provide a 25% NTCP-reduction in long-term symptomatic dysphagia and xerostomia. Model robustness was examined using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, cohort analysis, and tornado diagram. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify the cost-effective scenarios. IMPT was considered as cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below the societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. RESULTS: Compared with IMRT, IMPT provided an extra 0.205 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at an additional cost of 34,926.6 US dollars ($), and had an ICER of $170,082.4/ QALY for the base case. At the current WTP of China ($33,558 / QALY) and a current IMPT treatment costs of $50,000, IMPT should provide a minimum NTCP-reduction of 47.5, 50.8, 55.6, 63.3 and 77.2% to be considered cost-effective for patient age levels of 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50-year-old, respectively. For patients at the median age level, reducing the current IMPT costs ($50,000) to a $30,000 level would make the minimum NTCP-reduction threshold for "cost-effective" decrease from 91.4 to 44.6%, at the current WTP of China (from 69.0 to 33.5%, at a WTP of $50,000 / QALY; and from 39.7 to 19.1%, at a WTP of $100,000 / QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effective scenarios of PBT exist in Chinese OPC patients at the current WTP of China. Considering a potential upcoming increase in PBT use in China, such cost-effective scenarios may further expand if a decrease of proton treatment costs occurs or an increase of WTP level.