Value of routine follow-up for recurrence detection after treatment with curative intent for laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The benefits of routine follow-up after treatment of primary laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) remain disputed. Guidelines worldwide are consensus-based, and evidence for specific subgroups is lacking. This study evaluates routine LSCC follow-up including flexible endoscopy for detecting locoregional recurrence (LRR). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 413 LSCC patients treated between 2006 and 2012 was analysed. The cumulative risk of LRR was calculated. Routine follow-up was evaluated by follow-up visit (routine or interval) at which LRR was detected, LRR treatment intent, and overall survival (OS). Analyses were stratified by early (I-II) and advanced (III-IV) TNM-stage. RESULTS: There were 263 (64 %) patients with early-stage and 132 (32 %) patients with advanced-stage LSCC. One-, two- and five-year cumulative risks for LRR after early-stage LSCC were 8 %, 18 %, and 26 %. For advanced-stage LSCC, cumulative risks of LRR were 20 %, 30 %, and 35 %. Of all 69 LRRs after early-stage LSCC, 72 % were routine-detected, 81 % were symptomatic, and 90 % received curative-intent treatment. Of all 45 LRRs following advanced-stage LSCC, 42 % were routine-detected, 84 % were symptomatic, and 62 % received curative-intent treatment. Five-year OS of early-stage LSCC with routine-detected LRR was 70 %, and 72 % for interval-detection (log-rank-p = 0.91). Five-year OS of advanced-stage LSCC with routine-detected LRR was 37 %, and 18 % for interval-detection (log-rank-p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Routine follow-up for detecting asymptomatic recurrences seems redundant for early-stage LSCC. After advanced-stage LSCC, no asymptomatic recurrences were detected beyond one year posttreatment despite regular follow-up. Emphasis should be on other follow-up aspects, such as psychosocial support, especially after one year posttreatment.

A nationwide study on cancer recurrences, second primary tumours, distant metastases and survival after treatment for primary head and neck cancer in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: There is no consensus on the optimal duration of post-treatment follow-up after head and neck cancer (HNC). To generate site-specific input for follow-up guidelines, this study describes the incidence and timing of manifestations of disease during five years of follow-up. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with HNC in the Netherlands in 2015 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The follow-up events local recurrence (LR), regional recurrence (RR), second primary tumour (SPT), distant metastasis (DM) and death were studied per follow-up-year. The cumulative incidence of these events was calculated using competing risk analyses, with LR, RR and SPT of the head and neck (SPHNC) as events and SPT outside the head-neck (SPOHN), DM and death as competing events. Analyses were performed for oral cavity-, oropharynx-, larynx- and hypopharynx squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and all HNC patients. RESULTS: The 1-, 1.5-, and 2-year cumulative incidence of an event (LR, RR, SPHNC) were 10% (95%CI 8-13), 12% (95%CI 10-15), and 13% (95%CI 10-16) for oral cavity SCC; 6% (95%CI 4-9), 10% (95%CI 7-14), and 11% (95%CI 8-15) for oropharynx SCC; 7% (95%CI 5-10), 11% (95%CI 9-15), and 13% (95%CI 10-16) for larynx SCC and 11% (95%CI 6-19), 19% (95%CI 12-27), and 19% (95%CI 12-27) for hypopharynx SCC. CONCLUSIONS: One year of follow-up for oral cavity SCC, and 1.5 years for oropharynx-, larynx-, and hypopharynx SCC suffices for the goal of detecting disease manifestations after treatment. More research into other aspects of follow-up care should be performed to determine the optimal follow-up regimen.

Value of routine follow-up in oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer patients treated with curative intent.

BACKGROUND: The major goal of routine follow-up in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) patients is the asymptomatic detection of new disease in order to improve survival. This study evaluated the effect of routine follow-up on overall survival (OS). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 307 consecutive OPSCC patients treated with curative intent between 2006 and 2012 was analyzed. The effectiveness of routine follow-up was studied by comparing treatment-intent and OS in patients with asymptomatically versus symptomatically detected new disease. RESULTS: Three- and five-year risks of new disease were 29% (95% CI: 24-34) and 33% (95% CI: 27-39). Of the 81 patients with locoregional recurrence or second primary head and neck cancer, 8 (10%) were detected asymptomatically with no difference in OS with those detected with symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic detection of new disease during routine visits was not associated with improved OS. The focus of follow-up should be on providing psychosocial care and rehabilitation.

Second primary tumours after squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, location and timing of second primary tumours (SPT) after diagnosis of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and relate the risk of SPT to that after head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and the risks of those tumours in the general population in order to assess the need for a separate follow-up programme for OSCC patients and to aid development of an evidence-based and individualized follow-up programme for OSCC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients diagnosed with OSCC or HNSCC in the Netherlands in 1991-2015 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Cumulative incidence rates and Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIR) were calculated. Analyses were stratified by incidence period and age at primary diagnosis of the index tumour, follow-up time, and site of the SPT. RESULTS: We included 11263 patients with OSCC from a population of 34244 patients with HNSCC, of which the median follow-up time was 4.0 years. OSCC SPT develop in different patterns and at different locations than after HNSCC. The 5-year risk of SPT and SIR (95% confidence intervals) were respectively 0.13 (0.13-0.14) and 3.0 (2.9-3.1) for OSCC. The risk of a SPT was continuous over follow-up time and calendar period but decreased with an increasing age at diagnosis of the index tumour up to the age of 75 and there were differences in sites of SPT. CONCLUSION: A specific follow-up protocol for OSCC is needed, which can be individualized on the basis of, among others, age.

Time patterns of recurrence and second primary tumors in a large cohort of patients treated for oral cavity cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Routine follow-up after curative treatment of patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is common practice considering the high risk of second primaries and recurrences (ie second events). Current guidelines advocate a follow-up period of at least 5 years. The recommendations are not evidence-based and benefits are unclear. This is even more so for follow-up after a second event. To facilitate the development of an evidence- and personalized follow-up program for OSCC, we investigated the course of time until the second and subsequent events and studied the risk factors related to these events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 594 OSCC patients treated with curative intent at the Head and Neck Cancer Unit of the Radboud University Medical Centre from 2000 to 2012. Risk of recurrence was calculated addressing death from intercurrent diseases as competing event. RESULTS: The 1-, 5- and 10-year cumulative risks of a second event were 17% (95% CI:14%;20%), 30% (95% CI:26%;33%), and 37% (95% CI:32%;41%). Almost all locoregional recurrences occurred in the first 2 years after treatment. The incidence of second primary tumors was relatively stable over the years. The time pattern of presentation of third events was similar. DISCUSSION: Our findings support a follow-up time of 2 years after curative treatment for OSCC. Based on the risk of recurrence there is no indication for a different follow-up protocol after first and second events. After 2 years, follow-up should be tailored to the individual needs of patients for supportive care, and monitoring of late side-effects of treatment.