Background
Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)‐0129 recursive partitioning analysis was the basis for risk‐based therapeutic intensification trials for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). To the authors’ ...knowledge, the question of whether RTOG‐0129 overall survival (OS) estimates for low‐risk, intermediate‐risk, and high‐risk groups are similar in other data sets or applicable to progression‐free survival (PFS) is unknown. Therefore, the authors evaluated whether survival differences between RTOG‐0129 risk groups persist at 5 years, are reproducible in an independent clinical trial, and are applicable to PFS, and whether toxicities differ across risk groups.
Methods
Prospective randomized clinical trials were analyzed retrospectively. RTOG‐0129 evaluated standard versus accelerated fractionation radiotherapy concurrent with cisplatin. RTOG‐0522 compared the combination of cisplatin and accelerated fractionation with or without cetuximab. Patients with OPC with available p16 status and tobacco history were eligible.
Results
There was a total of 260 patients and 287 patients, respectively, from RTOG‐0129 and RTOG‐0522, with median follow‐ups for surviving patients of 7.9 years (range, 1.7‐9.9 years) and 4.7 years (range, 0.1‐7.0 years), respectively. Previous OS differences in RTOG‐0129 persisted at 5 years. In RTOG‐0522, the 5‐year OS rates for the low‐risk, intermediate‐risk, and high‐risk groups were 88.1%, 69.9%, and 45.1%, respectively (P for trend, <.001). The 5‐year PFS rates for the same 3 groups were 72.9%, 56.1%, and 42.2%, respectively. In RTOG‐0522 among a subgroup of patients considered to be at very good risk (p16‐positive disease, smoking history of ≤10 pack‐years, and classified with T1‐T2 disease with ipsilateral lymph nodes measuring ≤6 cm or T3 disease without contralateral or >6 cm lymph nodes), the 5‐year OS and PFS rates were 93.8% and 82.2%, respectively. Overall rates of acute and late toxicities were similar by risk group.
Conclusions
RTOG‐0129 risk groups persisted at 5 years and were reproducible in RTOG‐0522. However, there was variability in the estimates. These data underscore the importance of long‐term follow‐up and appropriate patient selection in therapeutic deintensification trials.
To the authors’ knowledge, the issue of whether Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)‐0129 overall survival estimates for low‐risk, intermediate‐risk, and high‐risk groups are similar in other data sets or applicable to progression‐free survival is unknown. In the current study, RTOG‐0129 risk groups appear to persist at 5 years, are reproducible in RTOG‐0522, and can be applied to progression‐free survival. However, there is variability in the estimates, which underscores the importance of long‐term follow‐up in therapeutic deintensification.
To update a clinical practice guideline on the use of chemotherapy and radiation therapy protectants for patients with cancer.
An update committee reviewed literature published since the last ...guideline update in 2002.
Thirty-nine reports met the inclusion criteria: palifermin and dexrazoxane, three reports (two studies) each; amifostine, 33 reports (31 studies); and mesna, no published randomized trials identified since 2002.
Dexrazoxane is not recommended for routine use in breast cancer (BC) in adjuvant setting, or metastatic setting with initial doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. Consider use with metastatic BC and other malignancies, for patients who have received more than 300 mg/m(2) doxorubicin who may benefit from continued doxorubicin-containing therapy. Cardiac monitoring should continue in patients receiving doxorubicin. Amifostine may be considered for prevention of cisplatin-associated nephrotoxicity, reduction of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (alternative strategies are reasonable), and to decrease acute and late xerostomia with fractionated radiation therapy alone for head and neck cancer. It is not recommended for protection against thrombocytopenia, prevention of platinum-associated neurotoxicity or ototoxicity or paclitaxel-associated neuropathy, prevention of radiation therapy-associated mucositis in head and neck cancer, or prevention of esophagitis during concurrent chemoradiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer. Palifermin is recommended to decrease severe mucositis in autologous stem-cell transplantation (SCT) for hematologic malignancies with total-body irradiation (TBI) conditioning regimens, and considered for patients undergoing myeloablative allogeneic SCT with TBI-based conditioning regimens. Data are insufficient to recommend use in the non-SCT setting.
Purpose Treatment of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is evolving toward risk-based modification of therapeutic intensity, which requires patient-specific estimates of overall survival ...(OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Methods To develop and validate nomograms for OS and PFS, we used a derivation cohort of 493 patients with OPSCC with known p16 tumor status (surrogate of human papillomavirus) and cigarette smoking history (pack-years) randomly assigned to clinical trials using platinum-based chemoradiotherapy (NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group RTOG 0129 and 0522). Nomograms were created from Cox models and internally validated by use of bootstrap and cross-validation. Model discrimination was measured by calibration plots and the concordance index. Nomograms were externally validated in a cohort of 153 patients with OPSCC randomly assigned to a third trial, NRG Oncology RTOG 9003. Results Both models included age, Zubrod performance status, pack-years, education, p16 status, and T and N stage; the OS model also included anemia and age × pack-years interaction; and the PFS model also included marital status, weight loss, and p16 × Zubrod interaction. Predictions correlated well with observed 2-year and 5-year outcomes. The uncorrected concordance index was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.80) for OS and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.74) for PFS, and bias-corrected indices were similar. In the validation set, OS and PFS models were well calibrated, and OS and PFS were significantly different across tertiles of nomogram scores (log-rank P = .003;< .001). Conclusion The validated nomograms provided useful prediction of OS and PFS for patients with OPSCC treated with primary radiation-based therapy.
Patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma have high survival when treated with radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Whether replacement of cisplatin with ...cetuximab—an antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor—can preserve high survival and reduce treatment toxicity is unknown. We investigated whether cetuximab would maintain a high proportion of patient survival and reduce acute and late toxicity.
RTOG 1016 was a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial at 182 health-care centres in the USA and Canada. Eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma; American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition clinical categories T1–T2, N2a–N3 M0 or T3–T4, N0–N3 M0; Zubrod performance status 0 or 1; age at least 18 years; and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive either radiotherapy plus cetuximab or radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks, and patients were stratified by T category (T1–T2 vs T3–T4), N category (N0–N2a vs N2b–N3), Zubrod performance status (0 vs 1), and tobacco smoking history (≤10 pack-years vs >10 pack-years). Patients were assigned to receive either intravenous cetuximab at a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 5–7 days before radiotherapy initiation, followed by cetuximab 250 mg/m2 weekly for seven doses (total 2150 mg/m2), or cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 22 of radiotherapy (total 200 mg/m2). All patients received accelerated intensity-modulated radiotherapy delivered at 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 6 weeks at six fractions per week (with two fractions given on one day, at least 6 h apart). The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation to death from any cause, with non-inferiority margin 1·45. Primary analysis was based on the modified intention-to-treat approach, whereby all patients meeting eligibility criteria are included. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01302834.
Between June 9, 2011, and July 31, 2014, 987 patients were enrolled, of whom 849 were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy plus cetuximab (n=425) or radiotherapy plus cisplatin (n=424). 399 patients assigned to receive cetuximab and 406 patients assigned to receive cisplatin were subsequently eligible. After median follow-up duration of 4·5 years, radiotherapy plus cetuximab did not meet the non-inferiority criteria for overall survival (hazard ratio HR 1·45, one-sided 95% upper CI 1·94; p=0·5056 for non-inferiority; one-sided log-rank p=0·0163). Estimated 5-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·4–82·5) in the cetuximab group versus 84·6% (80·6–88·6) in the cisplatin group. Progression-free survival was significantly lower in the cetuximab group compared with the cisplatin group (HR 1·72, 95% CI 1·29–2·29; p=0·0002; 5-year progression-free survival 67·3%, 95% CI 62·4–72·2 vs 78·4%, 73·8–83·0), and locoregional failure was significantly higher in the cetuximab group compared with the cisplatin group (HR 2·05, 95% CI 1·35–3·10; 5-year proportions 17·3%, 95% CI 13·7–21·4 vs 9·9%, 6·9–13·6). Proportions of acute moderate to severe toxicity (77·4%, 95% CI 73·0–81·5 vs 81·7%, 77·5–85·3; p=0·1586) and late moderate to severe toxicity (16·5%, 95% CI 12·9–20·7 vs 20·4%, 16·4–24·8; p=0·1904) were similar between the cetuximab and cisplatin groups.
For patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma, radiotherapy plus cetuximab showed inferior overall survival and progression-free survival compared with radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Radiotherapy plus cisplatin is the standard of care for eligible patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma.
National Cancer Institute USA, Eli Lilly, and The Oral Cancer Foundation.
Risk of cancer progression is reduced for patients with human papillomavirus (HPV) -positive oropharynx cancer (OPC) relative to HPV-negative OPC, but it is unknown whether risk of death after ...progression is similarly reduced.
Patients with stage III-IV OPC enrolled onto Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trials 0129 or RTOG 0522 who had known tumor p16 status plus local, regional, and/or distant progression after receiving platinum-based chemoradiotherapy were eligible for a retrospective analysis of the association between tumor p16 status and overall survival (OS) after disease progression. Rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank; hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated by Cox models. Tests and models were stratified by treatment protocol.
A total of 181 patients with p16-positive (n = 105) or p16-negative (n = 76) OPC were included in the analysis. Patterns of failure and median time to progression (8.2 v 7.3 months; P = .67) were similar for patients with p16-positive and p16-negative tumors. After a median follow-up period of 4.0 years after disease progression, patients with p16-positive OPC had significantly improved survival rates compared with p16-negative patients (2-year OS, 54.6% v 27.6%; median, 2.6 v 0.8 years; P < .001). p16-positive tumor status (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.74) and receipt of salvage surgery (HR, 0.48; 95% CI; 0.27 to 0.84) reduced risk of death after disease progression whereas distant versus locoregional progression (HR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.28 to 3.09) increased risk, after adjustment for tumor stage and cigarette pack-years at enrollment.
Tumor HPV status is a strong and independent predictor of OS after disease progression and should be a stratification factor for clinical trials for patients with recurrent or metastatic OPC.
Evaluate the prognostic and predictive impact of HPV-associated p16-expression and assess the combined prognostic impact of p16 and smoking on altered fractionated radiotherapy (AFRT) for ...oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) within the frames of the update of the Meta-Analysis of Radiotherapy in Carcinomas of Head and neck (MARCH).
Patients with OPC, known tumor p16-status and smoking history were identified from the MARCH update, resulting in a dataset of 815 patients from four randomized trials (RTOG9003, DAHANCA6&7, RTOG0129, ARTSCAN). Analysis was performed using a Cox model stratified by trial and adjusted on gender, age, T-stage, N-stage, type of radiotherapy fractionation, p16, smoking. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).
In total, 465 patients (57%) had p16-positive tumors and 350 (43%) p16-negative. Compared to p16-negative, p16-positive patients had significantly better PFS (HR = 0.42 95% CI: 0.34–0.51, 28.9% absolute increase at 10 years) and OS (HR = 0.40 0.32–0.49, 32.1% absolute increase at 10 years). No interaction between p16-status and fractionation schedule was detected. Smoking negatively impacted outcome; in the p16-positive subgroup, never smokers had significantly better PFS than former/current smokers (HR = 0.49 0.33–0.75, 24.2% survival benefit at 10 years).
No predictive impact of p16-status on response to AFRT could be detected but the strong prognostic impact of p16-status was confirmed and especially p16-positive never smoking patients have superior outcome after RT.
To test whether altered radiation fractionation schemes (hyperfractionation HFX, accelerated fractionation, continuous AFX-C, and accelerated fractionation with split AFX-S) improved local-regional ...control (LRC) rates for patients with squamous cell cancers (SCC) of the head and neck when compared with standard fractionation (SFX) of 70 Gy.
Patients with stage III or IV (or stage II base of tongue) SCC (n=1076) were randomized to 4 treatment arms: (1) SFX, 70 Gy/35 daily fractions/7 weeks; (2) HFX, 81.6 Gy/68 twice-daily fractions/7 weeks; (3) AFX-S, 67.2 Gy/42 fractions/6 weeks with a 2-week rest after 38.4 Gy; and (4) AFX-C, 72 Gy/42 fractions/6 weeks. The 3 experimental arms were to be compared with SFX.
With patients censored for LRC at 5 years, only the comparison of HFX with SFX was significantly different: HFX, hazard ratio (HR) 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.62-1.00), P=.05; AFX-C, 0.82 (95% confidence interval 0.65-1.05), P=.11. With patients censored at 5 years, HFX improved overall survival (HR 0.81, P=.05). Prevalence of any grade 3, 4, or 5 toxicity at 5 years; any feeding tube use after 180 days; or feeding tube use at 1 year did not differ significantly when the experimental arms were compared with SFX. When 7-week treatments were compared with 6-week treatments, accelerated fractionation appeared to increase grade 3, 4 or 5 toxicity at 5 years (P=.06). When the worst toxicity per patient was considered by treatment only, the AFX-C arm seemed to trend worse than the SFX arm when grade 0-2 was compared with grade 3-5 toxicity (P=.09).
At 5 years, only HFX improved LRC and overall survival for patients with locally advanced SCC without increasing late toxicity.
To provide a review of the clinical data, controversies, and limitations that underpin current recommendations for approaches to larynx preservation for locally advanced larynx cancer requiring total ...laryngectomy.
The key findings from pivotal randomized controlled trials are discussed, including quality of life, late effects, and function assessments. Trials investigating taxane inclusion in induction chemotherapy and trials of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibition for radiosensitization are put into perspective for larynx cancer. Controversies in the management of T4 primaries and the opportunities for conservation laryngeal surgery are reviewed.
There are data from clinical trials to support induction chemotherapy, followed by radiotherapy (preferred approach in Europe) and concomitant cisplatin plus radiotherapy (preferred in North America) for nonsurgical preservation of the larynx. Treatment intensification by a sequential approach of induction, followed by concomitant treatment, is investigational. Transoral laryngeal microsurgery and transoral robotic partial laryngectomy have application in selected patients.
The management of locally advanced larynx cancer is challenging and requires an experienced multidisciplinary team for initial evaluation, response assessment, and support during and after treatment to achieve optimal function, quality of life, and overall survival. Patient expectations, in addition to tumor extent, pretreatment laryngeal function, and coexisting chronic disease, are critical factors in selecting surgical or nonsurgical primary treatment.
To report the long-term results of the Intergroup Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 91-11 study evaluating the contribution of chemotherapy added to radiation therapy (RT) for larynx preservation.
...Patients with stage III or IV glottic or supraglottic squamous cell cancer were randomly assigned to induction cisplatin/fluorouracil (PF) followed by RT (control arm), concomitant cisplatin/RT, or RT alone. The composite end point of laryngectomy-free survival (LFS) was the primary end point.
Five hundred twenty patients were analyzed. Median follow-up for surviving patients is 10.8 years. Both chemotherapy regimens significantly improved LFS compared with RT alone (induction chemotherapy v RT alone: hazard ratio HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.95; P = .02; concomitant chemotherapy v RT alone: HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.98; P = .03). Overall survival did not differ significantly, although there was a possibility of worse outcome with concomitant relative to induction chemotherapy (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.61; P = .08). Concomitant cisplatin/RT significantly improved the larynx preservation rate over induction PF followed by RT (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.89; P = .0050) and over RT alone (P < .001), whereas induction PF followed by RT was not better than treatment with RT alone (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.82; P = .35). No difference in late effects was detected, but deaths not attributed to larynx cancer or treatment were higher with concomitant chemotherapy (30.8% v 20.8% with induction chemotherapy and 16.9% with RT alone).
These 10-year results show that induction PF followed by RT and concomitant cisplatin/RT show similar efficacy for the composite end point of LFS. Locoregional control and larynx preservation were significantly improved with concomitant cisplatin/RT compared with the induction arm or RT alone. New strategies that improve organ preservation and function with less morbidity are needed.
Tobacco smoking is associated with oropharynx cancer survival, but to what extent cancer progression or death increases with increasing tobacco exposure is unknown.
Patients with oropharynx cancer ...enrolled onto a phase III trial of radiotherapy from 1991 to 1997 (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group RTOG 9003) or of chemoradiotherapy from 2002 to 2005 (RTOG 0129) were evaluated for tumor human papillomavirus status by a surrogate, p16 immunohistochemistry, and for tobacco exposure by a standardized questionnaire. Associations between tobacco exposure and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by Cox proportional hazards models.
Prevalence of p16-positive cancer was 39.5% among patients in RTOG 9003 and 68.0% in RTOG 0129. Median pack-years of tobacco smoking were lower among p16-positive than p16-negative patients in both trials (RTOG 9003: 29 v 45.9 pack-years; P = .02; RTOG 0129: 10 v 40 pack-years; P < .001). After adjustment for p16 and other factors, risk of progression (PFS) or death (OS) increased by 1% per pack-year (for both, hazard ratio HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.01; P = .002) or 2% per year of smoking (for both, HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.03; P < .001) in both trials. In RTOG 9003, risk of death doubled (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.46 to 3.28) among those who smoked during radiotherapy after accounting for pack-years and other factors, and risk of second primary tumors increased by 1.5% per pack-year (HR, 1.015; 95% CI, 1.005 to 1.026).
Risk of oropharyngeal cancer progression and death increases directly as a function of tobacco exposure at diagnosis and during therapy and is independent of tumor p16 status and treatment.
PDF
