Oncological and functional outcomes for transoral robotic surgery following previous radiation treatment for upper aerodigestive tract head and neck cancers. A French multicenter GETTEC group study

BACKGROUND

Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) opens new perspectives. We evaluated the outcomes for patients having undergone TORS after previous radiotherapy.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter study (n = 138) in a previously irradiated area between 2009 and 2020. Survival was assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were evaluated using a chi-squared test, Fisher's test, or Wilcoxon's test.

RESULTS

The median length of hospital stay was 12.5 days. Bleeding was the most frequent postoperative complication (15.2%, n = 22). Prophylactic vessel ligation did not significantly decrease bleeding. Complications were significantly lower for Tis, T1, and N0 tumors. 91.6% (n = 120) of the patients with a perioperative tracheotomy could be decannulated. Larynx was functional for 65.94% of the patients. The median length of follow-up was 26 months. The 5-year overall and relapse-free survival rates were respectively 59.9% and 43.4%.

CONCLUSION

Oncological and functional results confirmed the value of TORS as a treatment in previously irradiated area.

[French national standard for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of upper aero-digestive tract - General principles of treatment]

OBJECTIVES

The management of upper aerodigestive tract cancers is a complex specialty. It is essential to provide an update to establish optimal care. At the initiative of the INCa and under the auspices of the SFORL, the scientific committee, led by Professor Béatrix Barry, Dr. Gilles Dolivet, and Dr. Dominique De Raucourt, decided to develop a reference framework aimed at defining, in a scientific and consensus-based manner, the general principles of treatment for upper aerodigestive tract cancers applicable to all sub-locations.

METHODOLOGY

To develop this framework, a multidisciplinary team of practitioners was formed. A systematic analysis of the literature was conducted to produce recommendations classified by grades, in accordance with the standards of the French National Authority for Health (HAS).

RESULTS

The grading of recommendations according to HAS standards has allowed the establishment of a reference for patient care based on several criteria. In this framework, patients benefit from differentiated care based on prognostic factors they present (age, comorbidities, TNM status, HPV status, etc.), conditions of implementation, and quality criteria for indicated surgery (operability, resectability, margin quality, mutilation, salvage surgery), as well as quality criteria for radiotherapy (target volume, implementation time, etc.). The role of medical and postoperative treatments was also evaluated based on specific criteria. Finally, supportive care must be organized from the beginning and throughout the patients' care journey.

CONCLUSION

All collected data have led to the development of a comprehensive framework aimed at harmonizing practices nationally, facilitating decision-making in multidisciplinary consultation meetings, promoting equality in practices, and providing a state-of-the-art and reference practices for assessing the quality of care. This new framework is intended to be updated every 5 years to best reflect the latest advances in the field.

[Organ preservation in oropharyngeal cancers treatment: What arguments for radiotherapy?]

Management of oropharyngeal cancer depends on several factors. Immediate surgery or radiotherapy may be considered. If the patient is operable, the choice depends on the extent of the disease, the contributing factors, and the expected functional results. For HPV-positive cancers, studies show comparable efficacy between surgery and radiotherapy. For early-stage cancers, unimodal treatment should be preferred. For HPV-negative cancers, the results of retrospective and observational studies are in favor of surgery. These studies have some limitations. In observational and/or retrospective studies, reclassification biases and the applicability of propensity scores weaken the validity of studies showing differences in management. Tumor and patient comparability are others majors interpretation biases. It is precipitate to conclude that surgery is superior for HPV-negative oropharyngeal cancers. Toxicity, therefore, becomes a criterion of choice for treatment. Unimodal management by surgery allows limited toxicity for the early stages. Surgery has less impact on salivation. Radiotherapy is rather less deleterious for swallowing in the early stages. For the advanced stages of HPV-induced tumors, the non-superiority of surgery should lead to the choice of radiochemotherapy. For oropharyngeal cancers, the possible benefit of surgery in HPV-negative oropharyngeal cancers must be confirmed in randomized studies. For the early stages of oropharyngeal cancer with unimodal treatment, management could be decided by shared decision making.