The Role of Adjuvant Treatment in Craniofacial Malignancy: A Critical Review

An MRI-Based Radiomics Nomogram to Assess Recurrence Risk in Sinonasal Malignant Tumors

BACKGROUND

Sinonasal malignant tumors (SNMTs) have a high recurrence risk, which is responsible for the poor prognosis of patients. Assessing recurrence risk in SNMT patients is a current problem.

PURPOSE

To establish an MRI-based radiomics nomogram for assessing relapse risk in patients with SNMT.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

A total of 143 patients with 68.5% females (development/validation set, 98/45 patients).

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

A 1.5-T and 3-T, fat-suppressed fast spin echo (FSE) T2-weighted imaging (FS-T2WI), FSE T1-weighted imaging (T1WI), and FSE contrast-enhanced T1WI (T1WI + C).

ASSESSMENT

Three MRI sequences were used to manually delineate the region of interest. Three radiomics signatures (T1WI and FS-T2WI sequences, T1WI + C sequence, and three sequences combined) were built through dimensional reduction of high-dimensional features. The clinical model was built based on clinical and MRI features. The Ki-67-based and tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) model were established for comparison. The radiomics nomogram was built by combining the clinical model and best radiomics signature. The relapse-free survival analysis was used among 143 patients.

STATISTICAL TESTS

The intraclass/interclass correlation coefficients, univariate/multivariate Cox regression analysis, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox regression algorithm, concordance index (C index), area under the curve (AUC), integrated Brier score (IBS), DeLong test, Kaplan-Meier curve, log-rank test, optimal cutoff values. A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The T1 + C-based radiomics signature had best prognostic ability than the other two signatures (T1WI and FS-T2WI sequences, and three sequences combined). The radiomics nomogram had better prognostic ability and less error than the clinical model, Ki-67-based model, and TNM model (C index, 0.732; AUC, 0.765; IBS, 0.185 in the validation set). The cutoff values were 0.2 and 0.7 and then the cumulative risk rates were calculated.

DATA CONCLUSION

A radiomics nomogram for assessing relapse risk in patients with SNMT may provide better prognostic ability than the clinical model, Ki-67-based model, and TNM model.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

3.

TECHNICAL EFFICACY

Stage 5.

A retrospective case-control study for the comparison of 5-year survival rates: the role of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in craniofacial bone sarcoma in adults

Background

The impact of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of craniofacial bone sarcomas has not been clarified. This study aimed to assess whether survival outcomes differed between patients who underwent adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

A retrospective search for adult patients diagnosed with malignant neoplasms of the craniofacial bones (International Classification of Diseases 10 codes C41.0-C41.1), within the past 20 years from the access date 28 April 2022, was conducted using the TriNetX network (TriNetX, Cambridge, MA, USA). Cohort I included patients who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy and cohort II included patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A refined search for individuals that received common chemotherapeutic agents, such as methotrexate, doxorubicin, cisplatin, and/or ifosfamide, was conducted and patients were assigned to cohort A (adjuvant chemotherapy) and cohort B (neoadjuvant chemotherapy). Following matching for age and sex, Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed, and risk ratio, odds ratio (OR), and hazard ratio were calculated.

Results

Patients were assigned to two cohorts, with 181 patients each after matching. In cohorts I and II, 55 and 41 patients died, respectively. No significant differences were found between the two cohorts regarding the 5-year survival probability (I: 59.87% versus II: 68.45%; p = 0.076; log-rank test), or the risk of dying (I: 0.304 versus II: 0.227; risk difference: 0.077; p = 0.096). The risk analysis before matching for age and sex showed a significant survival benefit in cohort II (OR: 1.586; p = 0.0295; risk difference: 0.093). After a refined query to identify patients treated with methotrexate, doxorubicin, cisplatin, and/or ifosfamide, the two cohorts included 47 patients, respectively. In cohort A (adjuvant chemotherapy), 19 patients died, whereas 12 patients died in cohort B (neoadjuvant chemotherapy) within 5 years after diagnosis. Further analysis indicated a greater survival in cohort B, but the survival probability between the cohorts did not differ significantly (A: 43.55% versus B: 54.49%; p = 0.171).

Conclusion

The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival rates in patients with surgically treated craniofacial bone sarcomas. Due to the retrospective nature of this study, randomized controlled studies are required to derive treatment recommendations.

Primary and radiation induced skull base osteosarcoma: a systematic review of clinical features and treatment outcomes

PURPOSE

We aim to systematically review and summarize the demographics, clinical features, management strategies, and clinical outcomes of primary and radiation-induced skull-base osteosarcoma (SBO).

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were used to identify relevant articles. Papers including SBO cases and sufficient clinical outcome data were included. A comprehensive clinical characteristic review and survival analysis were also conducted.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies describing 67 patients were included. The median age was 31 years (male = 59.7%). The middle skull-base was most commonly involved (52.7%), followed by anterior (34.5%) and posterior (12.7%) skull-base. Headache (27%), exophthalmos (18%), and diplopia (10%) were common presenting symptoms. Sixty-eight percent of patients had primary SBO, while 25% had radiation-induced SBO. Surgery was the main treatment modality in 89% of cases. Chemotherapy was administered in 65.7% and radiotherapy in 50%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12 months, and the overall 5-year survival was 22%. The five-year survival rates of radiation-induced SBO and primary SBO were 39% and 16%, respectively (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

SBO is a malignant disease with poor survival outcomes. Surgical resection is the primary management modality, in conjunction with chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Radiation-induced SBO has a superior survival outcome as compared to its primary counterpart. Complete surgical resection showed a statistically insignificant survival benefit as compared to partial resection.

Sinonasal cancers treatments: state of the art

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present review provides the reader with the state-of-the-art concepts of sinonasal oncology in view of the latest literature data.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most recent publications in sinonasal oncology assessed treatment timing, centralization, surgical approach, margin status, orbit/neck management, salvage strategies, emerging surgical technologies, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), particle radiotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

SUMMARY

Indications to endoscopic surgery for sinonasal cancer have plateaued and are unlikely to further expand. Endoscopic surgery provides noninferior results compared to open surgery and best suits timing constraints imposed by multimodal treatment. Management of orbit-encroaching sinonasal cancer is remarkably improving mostly owing to optimal use of nonsurgical strategies. Prognostic value of the margin status and management of the nodal basin and recurrent sinonasal tumors are far from being fully elucidated. Most promising surgical technologies are surgical navigation, optical imaging, and radiofrequency-aided ablation. IMRT and VMAT have theoretical technical advantages that are in the process of being clinically demonstrated. Pieces of evidence are progressively confirming the physical and radiobiological advantages offered by particle radiotherapy. Systemic therapy is being tested mostly in the neoadjuvant setting with the aim of improving outcomes in locally advanced sinonasal cancers; response to induction chemotherapy could better select a further locoregional approach.