A proposed framework for the implementation of head and neck cancer treatment at a new cancer center from a radiation oncology perspective

BACKGROUND

Establishing a new head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment center requires multidisciplinary team management and expertise. To our knowledge, there are no clear recommendations or guidelines in the literature for the commencement of HNC radiation therapy (RT) at a new cancer center. We propose a novel framework outlining the necessary components required to set-up a new radiation therapy HNC treatment.

METHODS

We reviewed the infrastructure and methodology in the commencement of HNC radiation therapy in our cancer care center and invited several external, experienced metropolitan head and neck radiation oncologists to develop a novel consensus guideline that may be used by new RT centers to treat HNC. Recommendations were presented to our internal and external staff specialists using a survey questionnaire with ratings utilized to determine consensus using pre-defined thresholds as per the American Society of Clinical Oncology Guidelines Methodology Manual.

CONCLUSION

This consensus recommendation aims to improve RT utilization whilst advocating for optimal patient outcomes by presenting a framework for new radiation therapy centers ready to step up and manage the treatment of head and neck cancer patients. We propose these evidence-based consensus guidelines endorsed by external HNC radiation oncologists.

Cetuximab-Based vs Carboplatin-Based Chemoradiotherapy for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer

Importance

Cetuximab-based and carboplatin-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are often used for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who are ineligible for cisplatin. There are no prospective head-to-head data comparing cetuximab-based and carboplatin-based regimens for radiosensitization.

Objective

To compare survival with cetuximab-based and carboplatin-based CRT in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included US veterans who received a diagnosis of HNSCC between January 2006 and December 2020 and were treated with systemic therapy and radiation. Data cutoff was March 1, 2022 and data analysis was conducted from April-May 2022.

Exposures

Cisplatin, cetuximab, or carboplatin-based systemic therapy as captured in VA medication data and cancer registry.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall survival by systemic therapy was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. We used propensity score and inverse probability weighting to achieve covariate balance between cetuximab-treated and carboplatin-treated patients and used Cox regression to estimate cause-specific hazard ratios of death associated with carboplatin vs cetuximab. We also performed subgroup analyses of patients with oropharynx vs nonoropharynx primary sites.

Results

A total of 8290 patients (median [IQR] age, 63 [58-68] years; 8201 men [98.9%]; 1225 [15.8%] Black or African American and 6424 [82.6%] White individuals) with nonmetastatic HNSCC were treated with CRT with cisplatin (5566 [67%]), carboplatin (1231 [15%]), or cetuximab (1493 [18%]). Compared with cisplatin-treated patients, patients treated with carboplatin and cetuximab were older with worse performance status scores and higher comorbidity burden. Median (IQR) overall survival was 74.4 (22.3-162.2) months in patients treated with cisplatin radiotherapy (RT), 43.4 (15.3-123.8) months in patients treated with carboplatin RT, and 31.1 (12.4-87.8) months in patients treated with cetuximab RT. After propensity score and inverse probability weighting, carboplatin was associated with improved overall survival compared with cetuximab (cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93; P = .001). This difference was prominent in the oropharynx subgroup.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of a US veteran population with HNSCC undergoing treatment with CRT, almost a third of patients were ineligible to receive treatment with cisplatin and received cetuximab-based or carboplatin-based radiosensitization. After propensity score matching, carboplatin-based systemic therapy was associated with 15% improvement in overall survival compared with cetuximab, suggesting that carboplatin may be the preferred radiosensitizer, particularly in oropharynx cancers.

Randomized phase 3 noninferiority trial of radiotherapy and cisplatin vs radiotherapy and cetuximab after docetaxel-cisplatin-fluorouracil induction chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced unresectable head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with unresectable, locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA-SCCHN); induction chemotherapy (ICT) may provide survival benefits in some patients. This study aimed to demonstrate the noninferiority of concomitant cetuximab plus radiotherapy (cet+RT) vs cisplatin plus radiotherapy (cis+RT) in patients with unresectable LA-SCCHN who were responsive to ICT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial studied patients with unresectable LA-SCCHN who received 3 cycles of ICT (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil; TPF) followed by cis+RT (standard arm) or cet+RT (experimental arm). The primary endpoint was noninferiority of the experimental arm vs the standard arm in terms of overall survival (OS), based on a hazard ratio (HR) of < 1.3. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, overall response, safety, and quality of life (QOL).

RESULTS

Between July 15, 2008, and July 5, 2013, 519 patients were recruited and started ICT; 407 patients received post-ICT treatment (cis+RT, n = 205; cet+RT, n = 202). At a median follow-up of 43.9 (cis+RT) and 41.1 (cet+RT) months, median OS was 63.6 and 42.9 months with cis+RT and cet+RT, respectively (HR [90% CI] = 1.106 [0.888-1.378], P =.4492). There were no differences in progression-free survival, overall response rates, or adverse event rates between groups. There was greater late neurotoxicity with cis+RT than cet+RT (P =.0058). Several QOL dimensions improved with cet+RT vs cis+RT (physical functioning, P =.0287; appetite loss, P =.0248; social contact, P =.0153).

CONCLUSION

Noninferiority of cet+RT over cis+RT was not demonstrated.

HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer de-escalation strategies and trials: Past failures and future promise

HPV-associated oropharynx squamous cell carcinomas are radiosensitive and chemosensitive, thus, portending a favorable prognosis. Treatment de-intensification strategies aim to reduce toxicity while maintaining efficacy. Although approaches that have substituted cisplatin with cetuximab or omitted chemotherapy have not been successful, Transoral Robotic Surgery with de-intensified adjuvant therapy has been promising. Additionally, personalized approaches are taking advantage of tumor biology and utilizing tumor reduction or hypoxia on imaging as a predictive marker to successfully de-escalate radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

De-Escalating Strategies in HPV-Associated Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

HPV-related head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) has emerged as a diverse clinical and biological disease entity, mainly in young patients with oropharyngeal tumors who are nonsmokers and nondrinkers. Indeed, during the past few years, the pendulum has shifted towards a new epidemiological reality, the “HPV pandemic”, where the majority of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCCs) are attributed to HPV. The oncogenic potential of the virus is associated to its capacity of integrating oncogenes E6 and E7 into the host cell, leading to the inactivation of several tumor suppressor genes, such as Rb. HPV status can affect prognosis in OPSCC, but its role as a predictive biomarker remains to be elucidated. Given the favorable prognosis associated with HPV-positive disease, the concept of de-escalation treatment strategies has been developed with the primary intent being the reduction of treatment-related long-term toxicities. In this review, we aim to depict current data regarding treatment de-escalation in HPV-associated OPSCC and discuss ongoing clinical trials.

[Trials in head and neck cancer - Highlights of the ASCO Annual Meeting 2021]

The therapeutic options in head and neck oncology are rapidly developing, especially through the use of checkpoint inhibitors. Currently, numerous therapeutic studies with new molecular targets or new drug combinations are underway in patients with head and neck cancer. The most important results of the studies presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting 2021 on head and neck cancer will be presented in this paper.