Patterns and distribution of regional nodal involvement and recurrence in a surgically treated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma cohort at a tertiary center.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate and describe the patterns of regional metastases and recurrences after surgical treatment of oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of patients diagnosed with OPSCC from 2006 to 2021 at a tertiary referral center. Only patients treated with surgery including a neck dissection were included. Patients with unknown human papillomavirus (HPV) status, prior head and neck cancer, distant metastases, or synchronous head and neck cancer were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 928 patients were included. 89% were males, the average age was 58.6 years (range: 25.2-87.5), 874 (94%) were HPV(+), and 513 (55.3%) had a tonsil cancer. Among cN + patients, the most commonly involved levels at presentation were level II (85.2%), level III (33.3%), and level IV (9.4%). In cN0 patients, metastases were only observed in level II (16.2%) and level III (9.2%). Nodal recurrence occurred in 48 (5.2%) patients after a median time of 1.0 years (interquartile range: 0.6-2.0). Nodal recurrence incidence was similar in HPV(+) and HPV(-) patients (5.0% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.44). The most common levels for regional recurrence were ipsilateral level II (45.8%), contralateral level II (43.8%), and ipsilateral level V (25.0%). Multivariable analysis revealed that pN was a significant predictor for regional recurrence (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: There is no difference in the distribution of regional metastases and recurrences in HPV(+) and HPV(-) OPSCC patients. Our findings align with the established understanding that regional metastases predominantly manifest in the ipsilateral level II-IV at presentation. Moreover, the data support the clinical recommendation to restrict elective neck dissection in cN0 patients to ipsilateral levels IIa and III, excluding level IIb. Regional recurrence is significantly associated with pN status.

Cardiopulmonary Toxicity Following Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) Versus Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) for Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) has the potential to reduce radiation dose to normal organs when compared to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). We hypothesized that IMPT is associated with a reduced rate of cardiopulmonary toxicities in patients with Stage III NSCLC when compared with IMRT. METHODS: We analyzed 163 consecutively treated patients with biopsy-proven, stage III NSCLC who received IMPT (n = 35, 21%) or IMRT (n = 128, 79%). Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were analyzed. Overall survival (OS), freedom-from distant metastasis (FFDM), freedom-from locoregional relapse (FFLR), and cardiopulmonary toxicities (CTCAE v5.0) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier estimate. Univariate cox regressions were conducted for the final model. RESULTS: Median follow-up of surviving patients was 25.5 (range, 4.6-58.1) months. Median RT dose was 60 (range, 45-72) Gy [RBE]. OS, FFDM, and FFLR were not different based on RT modality. IMPT provided significant dosimetric pulmonary and cardiac sparing when compared to IMRT. IMPT was associated with a reduced rate of grade more than or equal to 3 pneumonitis (HR 0.25, P = .04) and grade more than or equal to 3 cardiac events (HR 0.33, P = .08). Pre-treatment predicted diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide less than equal to 57% (HR 2.8, P = .04) and forced expiratory volume in the first second less than equal to 61% (HR 3.1, P = .03) were associated with an increased rate of grade more than or equal to 3 pneumonitis. CONCLUSIONS: IMPT is associated with a reduced risk of clinically significant pneumonitis and cardiac events when compared with IMRT without compromising tumor control in stage III NSCLC. IMPT may provide a safer treatment option, particularly for high-risk patients with poor pretreatment pulmonary function.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Head and Neck Cancers, Version 1.2022.

The NCCN Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancers address tumors arising in the oral cavity (including mucosal lip), pharynx, larynx, and paranasal sinuses. Occult primary cancer, salivary gland cancer, and mucosal melanoma (MM) are also addressed. The specific site of disease, stage, and pathologic findings guide treatment (eg, the appropriate surgical procedure, radiation targets, dose and fractionation of radiation, indications for systemic therapy). The NCCN Head and Neck Cancers Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant new data from publications and abstracts, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's most recent recommendations regarding management of HPV-positive oropharynx cancer and ongoing research in this area.

Distant metastases in head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To determine the pattern and risk factors for distant metastases in head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) after curative treatment with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was a retrospective study of 284 HNSCC patients treated in a single institution with IMRT. Sites included were oropharynx (125), oral cavity (70), larynx (55), hypopharynx (17), and unknown primary (17). American Joint Committee on Cancer stage distribution includes I (3), II (19), III (42), and IV (203). There were 224 males and 60 females with a median age of 57. One hundred eighty-six patients were treated with definitive IMRT and 98 postoperative IMRT. One hundred forty-nine patients also received concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy. RESULTS: The median follow-up for all patients was 22.8 months (range, 0.07-77.3 months) and 29.5 months (4.23-77.3 months) for living patients. The 3-year local recurrence-free survival, regional recurrence-free survival, locoregional recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival were 94.6%, 96.4%, 92.5%, 84.1%, and 68.95%, respectively. There were 45 patients with distant metastasis. In multivariate analysis, distant metastasis was strongly associated with N stage (p = 0.046), T stage (p < 0.0001), and pretreatment maximum standardized uptake value of the lymph node (p = 0.006), but not associated with age, gender, disease sites, pretreatment standardized uptake value of the primary tumor, or locoregional control. The freedom from distant metastasis at 3 years was 98.1% for no factors, 88.6% for one factor, 68.3% for two factors, and 41.7% for three factors (p < 0.0001 by log-rank test). CONCLUSION: With advanced radiation techniques and concurrent chemotherapy, the failure pattern has changed with more patients failing distantly. The majority of patients with distant metastases had no local or regional failures, indicating that these patients might have microscopic distant disease before treatment. The clinical factors identified here should be incorporated in future clinical trials.