The role of yearly chest radiography in the early detection of lung cancer following oral cancer

A survey on pulmonary screening practices among otolaryngology-head & neck surgeons across Canada in the post treatment surveillance of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Post treatment lung screening for head and neck cancer patients primarily focuses on the distant metastasis and a high rate of second primary can also be expected. The best screening tool and timing for this purpose is controversial. We sought out to assess the current practice and beliefs among Canadian Head and Neck Surgeons.

Methods

After Ethical Board approval, a nationwide survey was conducted through the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology (CSO) among head and neck surgeons regarding their practices for pulmonary screening in HNSCC patients.

Results

Our CSO survey among Otolaryngology-head and neck surgeons showed that 26 out of 32 respondents perform routine lung screen, out of which 23 (88%) feel that chest radiography should be preferred. The majority of respondents felt that lung screening could impact beneficially on mortality. For symptomatic patients, low-dose spiral CT was the preferred modality (48%), followed by PET/CT scan (14%) and sputum cytology (14%). In high-risk asymptomatic patients (current smoker, radiation exposure, family history and advanced HNSCC), 31% of respondents performed a CXR. The same percentage performed a low dose CT, while 19% relied on PET scan. A further 19% of respondents did not perform any screening in high-risk patients. Most respondents (77%) had more than 10 years practice since graduation from medical school and came from the provinces of Quebec, Ontario and Alberta.

Conclusion

Chest radiography remains the preferred modality for lung screening and was believed to be impacting beneficially on lung mortality. The recent literature does not seem to be in agreement with those beliefs. Further studies to establish which modality is best and concurrent nation-wide education are warranted.

Post-therapeutic surveillance schedule for oral cancer: is there agreement?

INTRODUCTION

Patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma represent a diverse group, and the treatment these patients undergo also varies widely. Some patients undergo local excision alone while others require extensive surgery, often with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The post-therapeutic surveillance schedule for these patients tends to be a "one size fits all" formula for all head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients, which has often been dictated by institutional doctrine or a senior surgeon's dogma. The post-therapeutic needs and risks of a T1 oral cancer patient treated with surgery alone differ from those of a patient with advanced laryngeal carcinoma, and the follow-up regimen should be tailored to the specific patient's risk of loco-regional recurrence, distant metastasis, and other related medical issues.

RESOURCES AND MATERIALS

A total of 65 papers were identified, 18 of which either focused on follow-up strategy for oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma or their tabular data allowed these cases to be extracted. Internationally recognized cancer entities were also queried.

CONCLUSIONS

No international consensus was achieved about the follow-up strategies. The value of post-therapeutic surveillance schedule following oral cancer treatment is generally not in dispute, although patient-initiated symptom-driven visits can be effective in identifying tumor recurrence for oral cancer patients. The range of appointment interval schemes tends to identify a progressive escalation of visit intervals such that there are more visits in the first year than in the second, and fewer yet during the third. Patients may fail to comply with their clinic visit structure. Most references agree that follow-up beyond the third year is unnecessary and may waste medical resources as well as the time of both patient and surgeon. There is no agreement as to the need for or interval of imaging studies.

Current concepts of surveillance and its significance in head and neck cancer

Follow-up in head and neck cancer (hNC) is essential to detect and manage locoregional recurrence or metastases, or second primary tumours at the earliest opportunity. A variety of guidelines and investigations have been published in the literature. This has led to oncologists using different guidelines across the globe. The follow-up protocols may have unnecessary investigations that may cause morbidity or discomfort to the patient and may have significant cost implications. In this evidence-based review we have tried to evaluate and address important issues like the frequency of follow-up visits, clinical and imaging strategies adopted, and biochemical methods used for the purpose. This review summarises strategies for follow-up, imaging modalities and key investigations in the literature published between 1980 and 2009. A set of recommendations is also presented for cost-effective, simple yet efficient surveillance in patients with head and neck cancer.

Oral Cavity and Oropharynx Tumors

Cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx are the most common head and neck cancers in the United States, and squamous cell carcinoma is the most frequent histologic type. The clinical behavior and outcome of tumors in the oral cavity is distinct from those of the oropharynx. As a general rule, surgical resection is the primary treatment for oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma, whereas oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas are treated with radiation with or without chemotherapy. A clear understanding of the anatomy and knowledge of clinical behavior and spread patterns of oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma are essential for radiologists to make a meaningful contribution to the treatment of these patients.

Cancer of the larynx

In Europe, laryngeal cancer accounts for only 2-5% of all cancers, the incidence being much higher among males than among females. Smoke and alcohol represent the major behavioural risk factors. Several carcinogens, occupations and vitamin deficiencies have been associated with laryngeal cancer. A genetic susceptibility to environmental risk factors and carcinogens is recognized. Hoarseness is the main symptom for which patients call for medical consultation. Mucosa is the most common histologic site of the primary lesions considered in the present chapter. Nodal involvement, the site and volume of the primary tumour, and some genes expression represent the major prognostic factors. A high death rate for not cancer-related events is to be pointed out. The loco-regional extent of the disease determines the success of cure. Surgery and radiotherapy represent the main therapeutic options. The choice between these two procedures is often controversial.

Screening for second primary lung cancer after treatment of laryngeal cancer

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

As a result of smoking, patients who have received curative treatment for laryngeal cancer run a high risk of developing lung cancer. Therefore, these patients enter a screening program that aims to detect lung cancer at an asymptomatic stage. The study evaluated whether screening for lung cancer by means of regular chest x-ray examinations contributed to prolonging survival.

STUDY DESIGN

A longitudinal follow-up study was performed to analyze the survival of patients who had received curative treatment for squamous cell laryngeal cancer and developed lung cancer during the follow-up period.

METHODS

Patients with lung cancer were divided into two groups: 1) patients with asymptomatic screen-detected lung cancer and 2) patients with complaints indicating lung cancer, whose tumor was detected in the interval between screening examinations by chest x-ray films.

RESULTS

In the complete group of patients with laryngeal cancer, no prognostic factors could be identified for developing lung cancer. There was no prolongation of survival in the screen-detected asymptomatic lung cancer patients. The median survival of both groups was 56 months (P =.57). The date of detection of the lung cancer was clearly brought forward by screening; a difference of 8 months was found between the median detection date of the two groups (P <.001). There was no difference in tumor-specific mortality between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Screening by chest x-ray examination to detect lung cancer in an asymptomatic stage after curative treatment for squamous cell laryngeal cancer does not improve survival for patients who develop lung cancer.

A half-yearly chest radiograph for early detection of lung cancer following oral cancer

In a retrospective analysis of 339 patients, treated with a curative intention for a squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity between 1988-1996, the value of a half-yearly routine chest radiograph during the first 2 years of follow-up, was evaluated. Metastatic or primary lung malignancies developed in 18 (5.3%) of the 339 patients in the first 2 years of the follow-up. In 11 (3.2%) patients these malignancies were detected on routine chest radiographs while in 7 (2.0%) patients these were detected on chest radiographs taken because of pulmonary complaints. The mean survival after detection of the pulmonary malignancy was 8 months. All patients died within 21 months, independent of pathology or therapy. No correlation was found between stage, location or differentiation of the primary tumour. As a result of this study it can be concluded that there is no benefit for the patient for a 6-month thoracic radiograph in routine follow-up for patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma. It gives false certainty and burdens the health care system.

Cancer of the oropharynx

Oropharyngeal cancer is a rare tumour. Tobacco use and alcohol consumption are recognised as major risk factors. Several carcinogens, occupational exposures and vitamin deficiencies represent the most significant predisposing factors. A varying host susceptibility to carcinogens can be inferred. Carcinoma of the oropharynx has to be suspected whenever sore throat, odynophagia, and ear-ache are described by the patient. Biopsy is mandatory for the definitive diagnosis. TNM classification is crucial for treatment decision-making, while stage grouping is less important. Prognostic factors are treatment-related. Standard treatment of T1-T2 tumours is radiation therapy, for T3 and T4 tumour treatment options are controversial. More advanced tumours can be treated either with surgery followed by conventional radiotherapy or by combined chemo-radiation. Non-conventional fractionation radiotherapy in combination with chemotherapy may represent a third option. Acute toxicity needs to be managed promptly. Late sequelae are less known. Treatment of such tumours requires a multidisciplinary approach within experienced centres.

Lung cancer after head and neck cancer: role of chest radiography

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether screening chest radiographs lead to significantly longer life span in patients found to have pulmonary lesions than in those in whom lung cancer was detected after symptoms developed.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Charts of 1,086 patients with squamous cell cancer of the head and neck treated for cure from January 1, 1974, to December 31, 1998, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Pulmonary cancer developed in 62 patients. In 41 patients pulmonary malignancy was found because of patient symptoms. In 21 patients lung cancer was detected by routine annual chest radiography. Seventy-five percent of lung cancers were detected within 3 years of initial treatment of the head and neck cancer.

CONCLUSION

Chest radiography is a poor screening tool, because it failed to find pulmonary lesions in more than 65% (41/62) of patients who were later found to have pulmonary cancer. Survival rate did not differ between patients in whom pulmonary cancer was found by screening chest radiography and those in whom symptoms prompted evaluation (P = .48). Using current treatment protocols, routine yearly chest radiography did not improve survival in patients with head and neck cancer. However, there maybe new therapeutic regimens under investigation that would benefit these patients if their lung cancers were found in early stages of disease. Future directives must include the establishment of an effective follow-up protocol for the early detection of lung malignancies in these patients.

The need for health promotion in oral cancer prevention and early detection

OBJECTIVES

This review paper provides a rationale for using health promotion to help reduce morbidity and mortality due to oral cancers by identifying barriers to prevention and early detection of these cancers and discussing strategies for change.

METHODS

A literature review of the following areas was conducted: epidemiology of and risk factors for oral cancers; knowledge, opinions, and practices of health care providers and the public regarding prevention, early detection, and control of oral cancers; and policies and regulations that either enhance or act as barriers to the prevention and early detection of oral cancers.

RESULTS

Overall, the public is ill-informed about risk factors for and signs and symptoms of oral cancers and relatively few US adults have had an oral cancer examination. Further, health care providers are remiss in providing oral cancer examinations and detecting early oral cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

To achieve the 13 oral cancer objectives contained in "Healthy People 2000," health care providers and the public must know the risk factors for these cancers as well as their signs and symptoms. Further, health care providers need to provide oral cancer examinations routinely and competently. Equally important, the public needs to know that an examination for oral cancer is available and that they can request one routinely. Thus, a vigorous agenda that includes education, policy, and research initiatives is needed to enhance oral cancer prevention and early detection.

Assessing physicians' and dentists' oral cancer knowledge, opinions and practices

Oral cancer is responsible for more than 8,000 deaths each year. This mortality may be attributed to lack of effective oral examinations by dental and medical primary care clinicians. This pilot project assessed the knowledge, opinions and practices of a group of Maryland physicians and dentists in oral cancer prevention, diagnosis and detection. Dentists performed more oral cancer examinations, although physicians saw more high-risk patients.

Clinical impact of synchronous and metachronous malignancies in patients with oral cancer

In a retrospective study, 20 of 379 patients (5.2%) with cancer of the oral cavity developed second malignant tumors (SMT) at various sites. The diagnosis of SMT was made with an average delay of 49.2 months. In view of the increasing incidence of SMT after curative treatment of oral cancer, the use of chemopreventive drugs should be considered.

Yearly chest radiography in the early detection of lung cancer following laryngeal cancer

In a retrospective study of 556 patients (505 men, 51 women) with laryngeal cancer the incidence and prognosis of lung malignancies was studied in patients who were examined yearly by chest radiography. In 69 patients (12.4%) a lung malignancy was diagnosed, with 28 having a histologically confirmed second primary malignancy. All of these 69 patients were men. The incidence of radiologically detected lung malignancies, both second primary and metastatic cancer, is higher and more prolonged following supraglottic carcinoma than following glottic carcinoma. In 47 patients (68%) without symptoms, the lung malignancy was detected by routine annual chest radiography. The survival rate in patients with lung cancer detected by the yearly radiography was significantly higher than in patients diagnosed after symptoms (median survival 10 and 4 months, respectively). However, taking into account the lead time between early radiologic diagnosis and the time a tumor would have been diagnosed following symptoms, the observed survival benefit of yearly radiography was much lower, or even nil.

Meta-analysis of second malignant tumors in head and neck cancer: the case for an endoscopic screening protocol

A meta-analysis was performed on data from the Washington University Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Tumor Registry and 24 studies reporting synchronous and metachronous malignancies in head and neck cancer patients. The overall second malignant tumor (second primary) prevalence was 14.2% in 40,287 patients, the majority of tumors being metachronous. Site relationships between index tumors and second primaries revealed significantly high risks along the digestive tract axis or the respiratory tract axis, although lung second primaries were prevalent in all groups. Head and neck second primaries were the largest group, being significantly more common in the oral cavity, oropharynx, and hypopharynx than in the larynx. Oral cavity index tumors showed the highest overall rate of second primary formation. Half of all aerodigestive tract second primaries are detected by 2 years from index tumor presentation, but non-aerodigestive tract tumors are common beyond 5 years. A significantly higher detection rate was proven for the prospective panendoscopy studies. We recommend routine interval endoscopic intervention within 2 years of treatment for optimum detection of second primaries in head and neck cancer patients. Also, a lifetime of clinical surveillance is suggested for aerodigestive tract second neoplasms in oral cavity, oropharynx, and hypopharynx cancer patients and for lung and non-aerodigestive tract neoplasms in larynx cancer patients.