Two modern methods of reirradiation, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), are established for patients with recurrent or second primary ...squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (rSCCHN). We performed a retrospective multi-institutional analysis to compare methods.
Data from patients with unresectable rSCCHN previously irradiated to ≥40 Gy who underwent reirradiation with IMRT or SBRT were collected from 8 institutions. First, the prognostic value of our IMRT-based recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) separating those patients with unresectable tumors with an intertreatment interval >2 years or those with ≤2 years and without feeding tube or tracheostomy dependence (class II) from other patients with unresected tumors (class III) was investigated among SBRT patients. Overall survival (OS) and locoregional failure were then compared between IMRT and SBRT by use of 2 methods to control for baseline differences: Cox regression weighted by the inverse probability of treatment and subset analysis by RPA classification.
The study included 414 patients with unresectable rSCCHN: 217 with IMRT and 197 with SBRT. The unadjusted 2-year OS rate was 35.4% for IMRT and 16.3% for SBRT (P<.01). Among SBRT patients, RPA classification retained an independent association with OS. On Cox regression weighted by the inverse probability of treatment, no significant differences in OS or locoregional failure between IMRT and SBRT were demonstrated. Analysis by RPA class showed similar OS between IMRT and SBRT for class III patients. In all class II patients, IMRT was associated with improved OS (P<.001). Further subset analysis demonstrated comparable OS when ≥35 Gy was delivered with SBRT to small tumor volumes. Acute grade ≥4 toxicity was greater in the IMRT group than in the SBRT group (5.1% vs 0.5%, P<.01), with no significant difference in late toxicity.
Reirradiation both with SBRT and with IMRT appear relatively safe with favorable toxicity compared with historical studies. Outcomes vary by RPA class, which informs clinical trial design. Survival is poor in class III patients, and alternative strategies are needed.
The therapeutic ratio of reirradiation for recurrent or second primary (RSP) squamous carcinoma of the head and neck may be improved in the intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) era. However, ...patient selection for reirradiation remains challenging. We performed a multi-institution cohort study to investigate modern outcomes after IMRT-based reirradiation and to identify prognostic subgroups.
Patients with RSP squamous carcinoma originating in a previously irradiated field (≥40 Gy) who underwent reirradiation with IMRT (≥40 Gy re-IMRT) were included. Locoregional failure and late toxicity were calculated using the Gray competing risk method. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS). Factors associated with OS were entered into a recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) for OS.
From 7 institutions, 412 patients were included. The median dose of re-IMRT was 60 Gy, and the median time between RT courses was 2.4 years. Chemotherapy was used in 76% of patients. The rates of grade ≥3, grade ≥4, and grade 5 acute toxicities were 19%, 4.4%, and 1.2%, respectively. The 2-year cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 late toxicity adjusted for the competing risks of recurrence or death was 14.2%. RPA identified 3 prognostic subgroups with distinct and homogenous OS (P<.001): class I included patients >2 years from their initial course of RT with resected tumors (2-year OS, 61.9%); class II included patients >2 years with unresected tumors or those ≤2 years and without feeding tube or tracheostomy dependence (2-year OS, 40.0%), and the remaining patients formed class III (2-year OS, 16.8%). Fifty-nine percent of class III patients underwent postoperative re-irradiation.
This study informs outcomes and expectations with IMRT-based reirradiation. The RPA classification identifies 3 distinct subgroups, which can guide patient selection for therapy and clinical trial design. RPA class III patients are not ideal candidates for protracted chemoradiation regardless of resection status.
To report the impact of radiotherapy quality on outcome in a large international phase III trial evaluating radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin plus tirapazamine for advanced head and neck cancer.
...The protocol required interventional review of radiotherapy plans by the Quality Assurance Review Center (QARC). All plans and radiotherapy documentation underwent post-treatment review by the Trial Management Committee (TMC) for protocol compliance. Secondary review of noncompliant plans for predicted impact on tumor control was performed. Factors associated with poor protocol compliance were studied, and outcome data were analyzed in relation to protocol compliance and radiotherapy quality.
At TMC review, 25.4% of the patients had noncompliant plans but none in which QARC-recommended changes had been made. At secondary review, 47% of noncompliant plans (12% overall) had deficiencies with a predicted major adverse impact on tumor control. Major deficiencies were unrelated to tumor subsite or to T or N stage (if N+), but were highly correlated with number of patients enrolled at the treatment center (< five patients, 29.8%; > or = 20 patients, 5.4%; P < .001). In patients who received at least 60 Gy, those with major deficiencies in their treatment plans (n = 87) had a markedly inferior outcome compared with those whose treatment was initially protocol compliant (n = 502): -2 years overall survival, 50% v 70%; hazard ratio (HR), 1.99; P < .001; and 2 years freedom from locoregional failure, 54% v 78%; HR, 2.37; P < .001, respectively.
These results demonstrate the critical importance of radiotherapy quality on outcome of chemoradiotherapy in head and neck cancer. Centers treating only a few patients are the major source of quality problems.
Although p16 protein expression, a surrogate marker of oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, is recognized as a prognostic marker in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC), its ...prevalence and significance have not been well established in cancer of the oral cavity, hypopharynx, or larynx, collectively referred as non-OPSCC, where HPV infection is less common than in the oropharynx.
p16 expression and high-risk HPV status in non-OPSCCs from RTOG 0129, 0234, and 0522 studies were determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH). Hazard ratios from Cox models were expressed as positive or negative, stratified by trial, and adjusted for clinical characteristics.
p16 expression was positive in 14.1% (12 of 85), 24.2% (23 of 95), and 19.0% (27 of 142) and HPV ISH was positive in 6.5% (six of 93), 14.6% (15 of 103), and 6.9% (seven of 101) of non-OPSCCs from RTOG 0129, 0234, and 0522 studies, respectively. Hazard ratios for p16 expression were 0.63 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.95; P = .03) and 0.56 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.89; P = .01) for progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively. Comparing OPSCC and non-OPSCC, patients with p16-positive OPSCC have better PFS and OS than patients with p16-positive non-OPSCC, but patients with p16-negative OPSCC and non-OPSCC have similar outcomes.
Similar to results in patients with OPSCC, patients with p16-negative non-OPSCC have worse outcomes than patients with p16-positive non-OPSCC, and HPV may also have a role in outcome in a subset of non-OPSCC. However, further development of a p16 IHC scoring system in non-OPSCC and improvement of HPV detection methods are warranted before broad application in the clinical setting.
To evaluate candidate fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) imaging biomarkers for head-and-neck chemoradiotherapy outcomes in the cooperative group trial ...setting.
Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) protocol 0522 patients consenting to a secondary FDG-PET/CT substudy were serially imaged at baseline and 8 weeks after radiation. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), SUV peak (mean SUV within a 1-cm sphere centered on SUVmax), and metabolic tumor volume (MTV) using 40% of SUVmax as threshold were obtained from primary tumor and involved nodes.
Of 940 patients entered onto RTOG 0522, 74 were analyzable for this substudy. Neither high baseline SUVmax nor SUVpeak from primary or nodal disease were associated with poor treatment outcomes. However, primary tumor MTV above the cohort median was associated with worse local-regional control (hazard ratio 4.01, 95% confidence interval 1.28-12.52, P=.02) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio 2.34, 95% confidence interval 1.02-5.37, P=.05). Although MTV and T stage seemed to correlate (mean MTV 6.4, 13.2, and 26.8 for T2, T3, and T4 tumors, respectively), MTV remained a strong independent prognostic factor for progression-free survival in bivariate analysis that included T stage. Primary MTV remained prognostic in p16-associated oropharyngeal cancer cases, although sample size was limited.
High baseline primary tumor MTV was associated with worse treatment outcomes in this limited patient subset of RTOG 0522. Additional confirmatory work will be required to validate primary tumor MTV as a prognostic imaging biomarker for patient stratification in future trials.
The quest for improved fractionation and combined modality regimens in head and neck cancer has also yielded progressively higher rates of toxicity. Time compression of dose delivery in accelerated ...fractionation has produced high rates of severe mucositis including the early stoppage of two randomized trials. The addition of chemotherapy has introduced systemic toxicity and can exacerbate local tissue reactions when used concurrent with radiotherapy. Mucositis is recognized as the principal impediment to efforts at further treatment intensification. The development and utilization of standardized toxicity grading criteria and accepted reporting standards has lagged toxicity production, impeding a full appreciation of the true extent of both acute and late toxicity. Objective data regarding acute and chronic effects on organ function are also sorely lacking. A better characterization of the frequency, severity, and duration of the various toxicities encountered in head and neck cancer will also allow the rational development of toxicity interventions. New methods are needed to summarize the global or aggregate toxicity of a treatment program. Further research into the assessment and analysis of toxicity is not only crucial to improvements in quality of life (QOL), but perhaps, improved rates of disease control as well.
To compare hyperfractionation versus standard fractionation for T2N0 vocal cord carcinoma in a randomized controlled trial.
Patients with T2 vocal cord cancer were stratified by substage (T2a vs T2b) ...and randomly assigned to receive either hyperfractionation (HFX) to 79.2 Gy in 66 fractions of 1.2 Gy given twice a day, or standard fractionation (SFX) to 70 Gy in 35 fractions given once a day. The trial was designed to detect a 55% reduction in the local failure hazard rate with 80% statistical power.
Between April 1996 and July 2003, a total of 250 patients were enrolled. Of 239 patients analyzable for outcomes, 94% were male, 83% had a Karnofsky performance status of 90-100, and 62% had T2a tumor. Median follow-up for all surviving patients was 7.9 years (range, 0.6-13.1 years). The 5-year local control (LC) rate was 8 points higher but not statistically significant (P=.14 for HFX 78% vs SFX 70%), corresponding to a 30% hazard rate reduction. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 49% versus 40% (P=.13) and overall survival (OS) was 72% versus 63% (P=.29). HFX was associated with higher rates of acute skin, mucosal, and laryngeal toxicity. Grade 3-4 late effects were similar with a 5-year cumulative incidence of 8.5% (3.4%-13.6%) after SFX and 8.5% (3.4%-13.5%) after HFX.
The 5-year local control was modestly higher with HFX compared to SFX for T2 glottic carcinoma, but the difference was not statistically significant. These results are consistent with prior studies of hyperfractionation showing a benefit in local control. Substaging by T2a versus T2b carries prognostic value for DFS and OS. For cost and convenience reasons other altered fractionation schedules have been adopted in routine practice.
Adverse event (AE) reporting in oncology has evolved from informal descriptions to a highly systematized process. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) is the predominant system ...for describing the severity of AEs commonly encountered in oncology clinical trials. CTCAE clinical descriptors have been developed empirically during more than 30 years of use. The method of data collection is clinician based. Limitations of the CTC system include potential for incomplete reporting and limited guidance on data analysis and presentation methods. The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) is a comprehensive medical terminology system used for regulatory reporting and drug labeling. MedDRA does not provide for severity ranking of AEs. CTC-based data presentations are the primary method of AE data reporting used in scientific journals and oncology meetings. Patient-reported outcome instruments (PROs) cover the subjective domain of AEs. Exploratory work suggests PROs can be used with a high degree of patient engagement and compliance. Additional studies are needed to determine how PROs can be used to complement current AE reporting systems. Potential models for integrating PROs into AE reporting are described in this review. AE reporting methods will continue to evolve in response to changing therapies and growing interest in measuring the impact of cancer treatment on health status. Although integration of PROs into AE reporting may ultimately improve the comprehensiveness and quality of collected data, it may also increase the administrative burden and cost of conducting trials. Therefore, care must be used when developing health outcomes and safety data collection plans.
Promising results in a randomized phase II trial with the hypoxic cytotoxin tirapazamine (TPZ) combined with cisplatin (CIS) and radiation led to this phase III trial.
Patients with previously ...untreated stage III or IV (excluding T1-2N1 and M1) squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx were randomly assigned to receive definitive radiotherapy (70 Gy in 7 weeks) concurrently with either CIS (100 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of weeks 1, 4, and 7 or CIS (75 mg/m(2)) plus TPZ (290 mg/m(2)/d) on day 1 of weeks 1, 4, and 7 and TPZ alone (160 mg/m(2)/d) on days 1, 3, and 5 of weeks 2 and 3 (TPZ/CIS). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The planned sample size was 850, estimated to result in 334 deaths, which would provide 90% power to detect a difference in 2-year survival rates of 60% v 70% for CIS versus TPZ/CIS, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.69).
Eight hundred sixty-one patients were accrued from 89 sites in 16 countries. In an intent-to-treat analysis, the 2-year OS rates were 65.7% for CIS and 66.2% for TPZ/CIS (TPZ/CIS--CIS: 95% CI, -5.9% to 6.9%). There were no significant differences in failure-free survival, time to locoregional failure, or quality of life as measured by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck.
We found no evidence that the addition of TPZ to chemoradiotherapy, in patients with advanced head and neck cancer not selected for the presence of hypoxia, improves OS.
PDF
