Re-irradiation combined with capecitabine in locally recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. A prospective phase II trial

Clinical Results and Prognostic Factors in Boron Neutron Capture Therapy for Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Under the Japan National Health Insurance System: A Retrospective Study of the Initial 47 Patients

PURPOSE

Recurrent head and neck cancer presents a therapeutic challenge because of cumulative toxicity from initial radiation therapy, limiting reirradiation options. Boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) offers a promising alternative, selectively delivering a radical dose to tumors while sparing adjacent normal tissue. This study investigates the initial clinical outcomes and prognostic factors associated with BNCT for recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This retrospective analysis investigated the initial 47 patients treated with BNCT between May 2020 and February 2021 in Japan. All patients had received radiation therapy with a median dose of 70 Gy (range, 44-176) before BNCT. Median tumor size was 11 cm3 (range, 1-117 cm3), with 23% of tumors larger than 30 cm3, and 87% of patients had prior systemic therapy. The most common prescribed dose to the pharyngeal mucosa was 15 Gy-Eq (36%), followed by 18 Gy-Eq (34%). The minimum dose given to tumor was 27.4 Gy-Eq (range, 13.3-45.2). In 23 patients, 18F-fluoro-borono-phenylalanine positron emission tomography was performed within 1 week before BNCT, and the tumor-to-blood 10B ratio was 3.5 (range, 2.0-8.7).

RESULTS

Efficacy analysis revealed a 51% complete response rate and a 74% overall response rate. Disease-free survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 34.6% and 26.6%, respectively. Overall survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 86.1% and 66.5%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that, among the patient characteristics, whether the lesion was mucosal had a significant effect on achieving complete response.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided valuable insights into the early integration of BNCT into routine clinical practice, highlighting its efficacy and safety. Technical improvements are needed to ensure precise dose administration. Ongoing prospective studies, such as the phase II REBIVAL study, will further elucidate the role of BNCT in recurrent head and neck cancer.

Safety of Boron Neutron Capture Therapy with Borofalan(10B) and Its Efficacy on Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: Real-World Outcomes from Nationwide Post-Marketing Surveillance

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to evaluate the real-world safety and efficacy of boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) with borofalan(10B) in Japanese patients with locally advanced or locally recurrent head and neck cancer (LA/LR-HNC).

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter observational study was initiated in Japan in May 2020 and enrolled all patients who received borofalan(10B) as directed by regulatory authorities. Patient enrollment continued until at least 150 patients were enrolled, and adverse events attributable to drugs, treatment devices, and BNCT were evaluated. The patients with LA/LR-HNC were systematically evaluated to determine efficacy.

RESULTS

The 162 patients enrolled included 144 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN), 17 patients with non-SCCHN (NSCCHN), and one patient with glioblastoma. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were hyperamylasemia (84.0%), stomatitis (51.2%), sialoadenitis (50.6%), and alopecia (49.4%) as acute TRAEs, and dysphagia (4.5%), thirst (2.6%), and skin disorder (1.9%) as more common late TRAEs. In patients with LA/LR-HNC, the overall response rate (ORR) was 72.3%, with a complete response (CR) in 63 (46.0%) of 137 patients with SCCHN. Among 17 NSCCHN patients, the ORR was 64.7%, with eight cases (47.1%) of CR. One- and two-year OS rates in patients with recurrent SCCHN were 78.8% and 60.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This post-marketing surveillance confirmed the safety and efficacy of BNCT with borofalan(10B) in patients with LA/LR-HNC in a real-world setting.

Advancements of radiotherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer in modern era

Head and neck cancer is a kind of cancer which can be eradicated from radical radiation therapy. However, with best efforts, nearly 40% patients will experience locoregional recurrence. Locoregional recurrence is the main cause of cancer-related death in head and neck cancers, so local treatments play a key role in improving progression free survival. In the last decades, radiation techniques have been tremendously developed, highly conformal radiation techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, brachytherapy and proton or heavy ion radiation therapy have their unique radiobiological advances. Although reirradiation is widely used in clinical practice, but little is known when comparing the different techniques. In this review, we will provide a comprehensive overview of the role of reirradiation in recurrent head and neck cancers including radiation techniques, patient selection, overall clinical benefits, and toxicities.

Current radiotherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer in the modern era: a state-of-the-art review

BACKGROUND

In the management of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, local recurrence is a common cause of treatment failure. Only a few patients with recurrent HNC (rHNC) are eligible for salvage surgery and the majority of patients receive systemic therapy and radiotherapy. In recent years, with the development of irradiation technology, radiotherapy for rHNC patients has markedly attracted clinicians' attention and its therapeutic effects on patients with end-stage cancer are worthy of investigation as well.

METHODS

Several studies have investigated the role of radiotherapy in the treatment of rHNC patients. We reviewed retrospective reports and prospective trials published in recent decades that concentrated on the management of rHNC.

RESULTS

A growing body of evidence supported the application of irradiation to rHNC patients. According to the results of this review, current radiotherapy could achieve a better efficacy with a lower incidence of toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy is a promising treatment for rHNC patients.

Capecitabine—A “Permanent Mission” in Head and Neck Cancers “War Council”?

Capecitabine, an oral pro-drug that is metabolized to 5-FU, has been used in clinical practice for more than 20 years, being part of the therapeutic standard for digestive and breast cancers. The use of capecitabine has been evaluated in many trials including cases diagnosed in recurrent or metastatic settings. Induction regimens or a combination with radiation therapy were evaluated in head and neck cancers, but 5-FU still remained the fluoropyrimidine used as a part of the current therapeutic standard. Quantifications of levels or ratios for enzymes are involved in the capecitabine metabolism to 5-FU but are also involved in its conversion and elimination that may lead to discontinuation, dose reduction or escalation of treatment in order to obtain the best therapeutic ratio. These strategies based on biomarkers may be relevant in the context of the implementation of precision oncology. In particular for head and neck cancers, the identification of biomarkers to select possible cases of severe toxicity requiring discontinuation of treatment, including “multi-omics” approaches, evaluate not only serological biomarkers, but also miRNAs, imaging and radiomics which will ensure capecitabine a role in both induction and concomitant or even adjuvant and palliative settings. An approach including routine testing of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) or even the thymidine phosphorylase (TP)/DPD ratio and the inclusion of miRNAs, imaging and radiomics parameters in multi-omics models will help implement “precision chemotherapy” in HNC, a concept supported by the importance of avoiding interruptions or treatment delays in this type of cancer. The chemosensitivity and prognostic features of HPV-OPC cancers open new horizons for the use of capecitabine in heavily pretreated metastatic cases. Vorinostat and lapatinib are agents that can be associated with capecitabine in future clinical trials to increase the therapeutic ratio.

Results of concurrent radiotherapy and immunotherapy in recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer: A single-center experience

OBJECTIVES

In metastatic and recurrent head and neck cancer (M/R HN-SCC), the median survival is less than a year and locoregional recurrence is the main cause of death. Our aim was to evaluate the results of concurrent stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and immunotherapy (ICI) in these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifteen patients diagnosed with M/R HN-SCC were evaluated retrospectively. All patients received SBRT (3x8 Gy) to all recurrent and metastatic foci with concurrent ICI.

RESULTS

Six months overall survival (OS) rates and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 93% and 86%, respectively. Local control (LC) rate in the site of SBRT was 96%. Higher survival and LC rates were achieved with lower doses of radiotherapy with the synergistic effect of SBRT and ICI.

CONCLUSION

Concurrent ICI and SBRT was feasible with excellent LC.

Boron neutron capture therapy using cyclotron-based epithermal neutron source and borofalan (10B) for recurrent or locally advanced head and neck cancer (JHN002): An open-label phase II trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) can be performed without reactors due to development of cyclotron-based epithermal neutron source (C-BENS), which is optimized for treatment for deeper-seated tumors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of cyclotron-based BNCT with borofalan (¹⁰B) for recurrent or locally advanced head and neck cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this open-label, phase II JHN002 trial of BNCT using C-BENS with borofalan (¹⁰B), patients with recurrent squamous cell carcinoma (R-SCC) or with recurrent/locally advanced non-squamous cell carcinoma (R/LA-nSCC) of the head and neck were intravenously administered 400 mg/kg borofalan (¹⁰B), followed by neutron irradiation. The tumor dose was determined passively as the mucosal maximum dose of 12 Gy-Eq. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). Post-trial observational JHN002 Look Up study was planned for evaluating locoregional progression-free survival (LRPFS).

RESULTS

Eight R-SCC and 13 R/LA-nSCC patients were enrolled. All R-SCC patients had prior radiotherapy with a median dose of 65.5 Gy (range, 59.4-76.0 Gy). The ORR for all patients was 71%, and complete response/partial response were 50%/25% in R-SCC and 8%/62% in R/LA-nSCC. The 2-year overall survival for R-SCC and R/LA-nSCC were 58% and 100%, respectively. The median LRPFS was 11.5 months for R-SCC. Frequently observed adverse events included alopecia (95%), hyperamylasemia (86%), and nausea (81%).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that BNCT using C-BENS with borofalan (¹⁰B) is a promising treatment option for patients with R-SCC or R/LA-nSCC of the head and neck.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy With Capecitabine Plus Cisplatin in Patients With Locally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Cancer: Case Series Study

Purpose

Capecitabine, an oral fluorouracil (5-FU) derivative, has replaced 5-FU in many chemotherapy regimens used in various GI tract cancers. The experience with capecitabine in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is limited.

Patients and Methods

We report on eight patients with locally advanced NPC treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy with capecitabine and cisplatin.

Results

All eight patients responded well to the chemotherapy combination and achieved complete remission after definitive chemoradiotherapy. No grade 3/4 toxicities were observed. Five patients experienced a relapse after 6, 8, 9, 12, and 17 months.

Conclusion

In the patients studied, capecitabine (in combination with cisplatin) was a safe and effective substitution for 5-FU for the neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced NPC. Larger prospective clinical studies are required to confirm these results.

Locoregionally recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: incidence, survival, prognostic factors, and treatment outcomes

Purpose

For locoregionally recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), appropriate therapeutic decisions remain unclear. We examined the treatment outcomes of a national cohort to determine suitable treatments for and prognostic factors in patients with locoregionally recurrent HNSCCs at different stages and sites.

Patients and methods

We analyzed data of >20-year-old patients with HNSCC at American Joint Committee on Cancer clinical stages I–IV without metastasis from Taiwan National Health Insurance and cancer registry databases. The index date was the date of recurrent HNSCC diagnosis. Recurrent HNSCC was defined as the annotation of locoregional recurrence with tissue proof in cancer registry databases. The enrolled patients were categorized into three groups: Group 1 comprised those undergoing chemotherapy (CT) alone; Group 2 comprised those receiving reirradiation (re-RT) alone (total radiation dose ≥ 60 Gy through intensity modulation radiation therapy [IMRT]); Group 3 comprised those receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) alone (irradiation total dose ≥60 Gy through IMRT); and Group 4 comprised those receiving salvage surgery with or without RT or CT.

Results

We enrolled 4,839 and 28,664 HNSCC patients with and without locoregional recurrence, respectively (median follow-up, 3.25 years). Locoregional recurrence rate and incidence were 14.44% and 40.73 per 1,000 person-years, respectively. Age ≥ 65 years, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) score > 6, advanced clinical stage at first diagnosis, and recurrence-free interval < 1 year were significant independent prognostic risk factors for overall survival as per univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. After adjusting for age, sex, CCI scores, clinical stage at first diagnosis, and recurrence-free interval, adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for overall mortality in recurrent clinical stages I and II were 0.63 (0.45–0.89, p = 0.009), 0.65 (0.52–0.83, p < 0.001), and 0.32 (0.26–0.40, p < 0.001) in Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively, whereas they were 1.23 (0.99–1.52, p = 0.062), 0.69 (0.60–0.79, p < 0.001), and 0.39 (0.34–0.44, p < 0.001) for Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively, for overall mortality in recurrent clinical stage III and IV.

Conclusions

Age, CCI score, clinical stage at first diagnosis, and recurrence-free interval are significant independent prognostic factors for overall survival of recurrent HNSCC patients. Regardless of recurrence stage or site, salvage surgery is the recommended first recurrent HNSCC treatment choice. Re-RT alone and CCRT are more suitable for inoperable recurrent early-stage oral and nonoral cavity recurrent HNSCCs, respectively.

Outcomes of patients with loco-regionally recurrent or new primary squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck treated with curative intent reirradiation at Mayo Clinic

BACKGROUND

We reviewed outcomes of patients with loco-regionally recurrent (LRR) or new primary (NP) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) treated at our institution with reirradiation (RRT).

METHODS

Patients received definitive RRT (DRRT) or post-operative RRT following salvage surgery (PRRT) from 2003 to 2011. Measured survival outcomes included loco-regional relapse free survival (LRFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among 81 patients (PRRT, 42; DRRT, 39), median PRRT and DRRT doses were 60 Gy (12-70 Gy) and 69.6 Gy (48-76.8 Gy). The majority of patients received IMRT-based RRT (n = 77, 95 %). With median follow-up of 78.1 months (95 % CI, 56-96.8 months), 2-year OS was 53 % with PRRT and 48 % with DRRT (p = 0.12); 23 % of patients were alive at last follow-up. LRFS at 2 years was 60 %, and did not differ significantly between PRRT and DRRT groups. A trend toward inferior LRFS was noted among patients receiving chemotherapy with RRT versus RRT alone (p = 0.06). Late serious toxicities were uncommon, including osteoradionecrosis (2 patients) and carotid artery bleeding (1 patient, non-fatal).

CONCLUSIONS

OS of PRRT- and DRRT-treated patients in this series appears superior to the published literature. We used IMRT for the majority of patients, in contrast to several series and trials previously reported, which may account in part for this difference. Future studies should seek to improve outcomes among patients with LRR/NP SCCHN via alternative therapeutic modalities such as proton radiotherapy and by incorporating novel systemic agents.

The effect of cilengitide in combination with irradiation and chemotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cell lines

BACKGROUND

Integrins are highly attractive targets in oncology due to their involvement in angiogenesis in a wide spectrum of cancer entities. Among several integrin inhibitors under clinical evaluation, cilengitide is the most promising compound. However, little is known about the cellular processes induced during cilengitide therapy in combination with irradiation and cisplatin in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The cytostatic effect of cilengitide was assessed by proliferation assay in the three HNSCC cell lines SCC25, FaDu and CAL27. Combination experiments with cisplatin and irradiation were performed. Possible synergistic effects were calculated in combination index (CI) analyses. Colony forming inhibition was investigated in clonogenic assays. Real-time PCR arrays were used to evaluate target protein gene expression patterns. Flow cytometry was used to detect apoptosis.

RESULTS

Used alone, cilengitide has only minor cytotoxic effects in HNSCC cell lines. However, combination with cisplatin resulted in synergistic growth inhibition in all three cell lines. Irradiation showed synergism in short-term experiments and in colony forming assays, an additive effect was detected. Real-time PCR assay detected downregulation of the antiapoptotic protein Bcl-2 after exposure of cells to cilengitide.

CONCLUSION

Cilengitide in combination with cisplatin and irradiation may be a feasible option for the treatment of patients with head and neck cancer. However, further investigations are required to understand the exact mechanism that leads to synergistic cytotoxicity.

Recurrent and second primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: when and how to reirradiate

BACKGROUND

Local and/or regional recurrence and metachronous primary tumor arising in a previously irradiated area are rather frequent events in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Re-treatment is associated with an increased risk of serious toxicity and impaired quality of life (QOL) with an uncertain survival advantage.

METHODS

We analyzed the literature on the efficacy and toxicity of photon/electron-based external beam reirradiation for previously irradiated patients with HNSCC of non-nasopharyngeal origin. Studies were grouped according to the radiotherapy technique used for reirradiation. Patient selection criteria, target volume identification method, tumor dose, fractionation schedule, systemic therapy administration, and toxicities were reviewed.

RESULTS

In addition to disease-related factors, current comorbidities and preexisting organ dysfunction must be considered when selecting patients for reirradiation. As morbidity from re-treatment may be considerable and differ depending on which mode of re-treatment is used, it is important to give patients information on potential morbidity outcomes so that an informed choice can be made within a shared decision-making context. With improved dose distribution and adequate imaging support, including positron emission tomography-CT, modern radiotherapy techniques may improve local control and reduce toxicity of reirradiation. A reirradiation dose of ≥60 Gy and a volume encompassing the gross tumor with up to a 5-mm margin are recommended. Concomitant administration of systemic therapeutics and reirradiation is likely to be of similar benefit as observed in large randomized studies of upfront therapy.

CONCLUSION

Reirradiation, administered either with or without concurrent systemic therapy, is feasible and tolerable in properly selected patients with recurrent or a new primary tumor in a previously irradiated area of the head and neck, offering a meaningful survival (in the range of 10% to 30% at 2 years). Whenever feasible, salvage surgery is the method of choice for curative intent; patients at high-risk for local recurrence should be advised that postoperative reirradiation is expected to increase locoregional control at the expense of higher toxicity and without survival advantage compared to salvage surgery without reirradiation. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 37: 134-150, 2015.