Association of low adherence to weekly cisplatin with outcomes in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline recommends consideration of weekly cisplatin as an alternative option for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing definitive chemoradiation. However, in a recent phase III trial (ConCERT), 20% of patients treated with weekly cisplatin could not receive a total of 200 mg/m2, and the association of low adherence to weekly cisplatin and cancer control outcomes remains unclear. To fill this knowledge gap, we performed an observational cohort study of patients with head and neck cancer undergoing definitive chemoradiation with weekly cisplatin. METHODS: Our institutional database was queried for patients with non-metastatic head and neck cancer who underwent definitive chemoradiation with weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m2) between November 2007 and April 2023. Adherence to weekly cisplatin was defined as receiving at least 5 cycles with a total cumulative dose of 200 mg/m2. Survival outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank tests, Cox proportional hazard multivariable (MVA) analyses. Logistic MVA was performed to identify variables associated with low adherence to weekly cisplatin. Fine-Gray MVA was performed to analyze failure outcomes with death as a competing event. RESULTS: Among 119 patients who met our criteria, 51 patients (42.9%) had low adherence to weekly cisplatin. Median follow up was 19.8 months (interquartile range 8.8-65.6). Low adherence to weekly cisplatin was associated with worse overall survival (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR] 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-5.47, p < 0.001) and progression-free survival (aHR 2.32, 95% CI 1.29-4.17, p = 0.005). It was also associated with worse distant failure (aHR 4.55, 95% CI 1.19-17.3, p = 0.03), but not locoregional failure (aHR 1.61, 95% CI 0.46-5.58, p = 0.46). KPS < 90 was the only variable associated with low adherence to weekly cisplatin (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.67, 95% CI 1.10-6.65, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Our study suggested that over 40% of patients underwent fewer than 5 weekly cisplatin cycles and that low adherence to weekly cisplatin was an independent, adverse prognostic factor for worse survival and distant failure outcomes. Those with reduced adherence to weekly cisplatin were more likely to have poor performance status. Further studies are warranted to improve the adherence to chemotherapy and outcomes.

Is Dental Specialty Referral Associated With Earlier Presentation of Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinoma?

BACKGROUND: Oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) may mimic other more common odontogenic processes such as infection, trauma, and benign pathology. Delays in diagnosis and treatment are known to result in poorer survival outcomes. PURPOSE: The study purpose was to measure the association between referral type and OSCC stage at time of presentation. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: This was a retrospective cohort study composed of newly diagnosed OSCC patients treated with surgical resection from 2014 to 2023 at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center. Patients who presented with self-referrals or had surgical treatment outside of Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center were excluded. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The primary predictor was referral source (dental vs medical specialty). MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: The primary outcome was pathological T stage (pT stage). The secondary outcome was overall survival (OS). COVARIATES: Covariates included demographic data and cancer-related variables (symptomatology, subsite, and risk factors). ANALYSES: A multivariate logistical regression model for pT stage was constructed using all significant covariates as well as preoperative patient and tumor characteristics. For OS, Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed and compared with the log-rank test. A P < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 215 subjects were included in the study sample. The majority were referred by a dental provider (n = 132, 62.3%). Dental referrals presented with significantly earlier T stage disease (RRpT3/T4 0.65, P < .01) and had lower rates of cervical nodal positivity (RRpN1-N3 0.62, P = .01). Dental referral independently increased the odds of early pT stage presentation (odds ratio 5.10, P < .01) after controlling for age, sex, oral pain symptoms, social history (smoking and drinking), head neck cancer history, and tumor subsite. Dental referrals had significantly improved OS (P = .03) and were also associated with lower rates of oral pain symptoms (RRoral pain 0.80, P = .02), lymphovascular invasion (RRLVI 0.50; P = .04), and perineural invasion (RRPNI 0.63, P = .04). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among subjects with similar risk factors, those referred from dental providers were found to have earlier stage disease. Unfortunately, over half of dental referrals still presented with pain symptoms and more than a third presented with locally advanced disease. Dental providers appear to be positioned to detect earlier OSCC; however, there is room for improvement.

Association of pre-treatment lymphocyte-monocyte ratio with survival outcome in patients with head and neck cancer treated with chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: Given the role of systematic inflammation in cancer progression, lymphocyte-monocyte ratio (LMR) from peripheral blood has been suggested as a biomarker to assess the extent of inflammation in several solid malignancies. However, the role of LMR as a prognostic factor in head and neck cancer was unclear in several meta-analyses, and there is a paucity of literature including patients in North America. We performed an observational cohort study to evaluate the association of LMR with survival outcomes in North American patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective database was queried for patients with non-metastatic head and neck cancer who underwent definitive chemoradiation from June 2007 to April 2021 at the Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The association of LMR with OS and CSS was examined using nonlinear Cox proportional hazard model using restricted cubic splines (RCS). Cox multivariable analysis (MVA) and Kaplan-Meier method were used to analyze OS and CSS. Pre-radiation LMR was then stratified into high and low based on its median value. Propensity scored matching was used to reduce the selection bias. RESULTS: A total of 476 patients met our criteria. Median follow up was 45.3 months (interquartile range 22.8-74.0). The nonlinear Cox regression model showed that low LMR was associated with worse OS and CSS in a continuous fashion without plateau for both OS and CSS. On Cox MVA, higher LMR as a continuous variable was associated with improved OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0,90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.99, p = 0.03) and CSS (aHR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.95, p = 0.009). The median value of LMR was 3.8. After propensity score matching, a total of 186 pairs were matched. Lower LMR than 3.8 remained to be associated with worse OS (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.12-2.26, p = 0.009) and CSS (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.08-2.63, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Low LMR, both as a continuous variable and dichotomized variable, was associated with worse OS and CSS. Further studies would be warranted to evaluate the role of such prognostic marker to tailor interventions.

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.

Head and Neck Cancers, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Treatment is complex for patients with head and neck (H&N) cancers with specific site of disease, stage, and pathologic findings guiding treatment decision-making. Treatment planning for H&N cancers involves a multidisciplinary team of experts. This article describes supportive care recommendations in the NCCN Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancers, as well as the rationale supporting a new section on imaging recommendations for patients with H&N cancers. This article also describes updates to treatment recommendations for patients with very advanced H&N cancers and salivary gland tumors, specifically systemic therapy recommendations.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Head and Neck Cancers, Version 1.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Head and Neck (H&N) Cancers provide treatment recommendations for cancers of the lip, oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, ethmoid and maxillary sinuses, and salivary glands. Recommendations are also provided for occult primary of the H&N, and separate algorithms have been developed by the panel for very advanced H&N cancers. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussion and most recent recommendations regarding evaluation and treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Head and Neck Cancers, Version 2.2017.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Head and Neck Cancers provide treatment recommendations for cancers of the lip, oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, ethmoid and maxillary sinuses, and salivary glands. Recommendations are also provided for occult primary of the head and neck (H&N), and separate algorithms have been developed by the panel for very advanced H&N cancers. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussion and most recent recommendations regarding the increase in human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer and the availability of immunotherapy agents for treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic H&N cancer.

Head and Neck Cancers, Version 1.2015.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the 2015 NCCN Guidelines for Head and Neck (H&N) Cancers. These Insights describe the different types of particle therapy that may be used to treat H&N cancers, in contrast to traditional radiation therapy (RT) with photons (x-ray). Research is ongoing regarding the different types of particle therapy, including protons and carbon ions, with the goals of reducing the long-term side effects from RT and improving the therapeutic index. For the 2015 update, the NCCN H&N Cancers Panel agreed to delete recommendations for neutron therapy for salivary gland cancers, because of its limited availability, which has decreased over the past 2 decades; the small number of patients in the United States who currently receive this treatment; and concerns that the toxicity of neutron therapy may offset potential disease control advantages.

Head and neck cancers, Version 2.2014. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology.

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Head and Neck Cancers focuses on glottic laryngeal cancer, which is the most common type of laryngeal cancer and has an excellent cure rate. The lymphatic drainage of the glottis is sparse, and early stage primaries rarely spread to regional nodes. Because hoarseness is an early symptom, most glottic laryngeal cancer is early stage at diagnosis. Updates to these guidelines for 2014 include revisions to "Principles of Radiation Therapy" for each site and "Principles of Surgery," and the addition of a new section on "Principles of Dental Evaluation and Management."