[Data from the 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting on surgical therapy]

Last year, studies on immuno-oncologic treatment approaches for recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer were the main focus at the two major international cancer congresses of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). The success of these therapeutic strategies has led to many new studies, including their use in the neoadjuvant setting. This review article summarizes presented studies from ASCO 2022 in which surgical therapy is the focus of the study protocol and also includes study results on neoadjuvant treatment strategies. No surgical trials were presented at ESMO 2022. At ASCO 2022 as well as in previous years, it became increasingly clear that treatment de-escalation in the context of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma treatment involving surgical measures appears to be oncologically safe and functionally beneficial. In addition, a number of studies indicate that in the setting of neoadjuvant administration of immuno-oncologic agents, a proportion of patients have pathologic complete remission. In this fraction of patients, which is usually significantly smaller than 50%, survival data are better than in those who have already failed to respond to neoadjuvant therapy. Unfortunately, however, significant toxicities or tumor progression with the risk of inoperability were also seen under these current therapeutic regimens, leading to discontinuation of therapy in 5-20% of cases. It remains to be seen whether neoadjuvancy with immune checkpoint inhibitors can establish itself, in contrast to the failed attempts of the past with the use of cytostatics.

Consensuses, controversies, and future directions in treatment deintensification for human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer

The most common cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in the United States is oropharyngeal cancer (OPC), and its incidence has been rising since the turn of the century. Because of substantial long-term morbidities with chemoradiation and the favorable prognosis of HPV-positive OPC, identifying the optimal deintensification strategy for this group has been a keystone of academic head-and-neck surgery, radiation oncology, and medical oncology for over the past decade. However, the first generation of randomized chemotherapy deintensification trials failed to change the standard of care, triggering concern over the feasibility of de-escalation. National database studies estimate that up to one third of patients receive nonstandard de-escalated treatments, which have subspecialty-specific nuances. A synthesis of the multidisciplinary deintensification data and current treatment standards is important for the oncology community to reinforce best practices and ensure optimal patient outcomes. In this review, the authors present a summary and comparison of prospective HPV-positive OPC de-escalation trials. Chemotherapy attenuation compromises outcomes without reducing toxicity. Limited data comparing transoral robotic surgery (TORS) with radiation raise concern over toxicity and outcomes with TORS. There are promising data to support de-escalating adjuvant therapy after TORS, but consensus on treatment indications is needed. Encouraging radiation deintensification strategies have been reported (upfront dose reduction and induction chemotherapy-based patient selection), but level I evidence is years away. Ultimately, stage and HPV status may be insufficient to guide de-escalation. The future of deintensification may lie in incorporating intratreatment response assessments to harness the powers of personalized medicine and integrate real-time surveillance.