Abstract Increasingly, squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx (OPSCC) is attributable to transformation resulting from high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Such cancers are ...significantly more responsive to treatment than traditional tobacco- and alcohol-associated squamous cell cancers of the head and neck. Conventional management with definitive chemoradiation, surgery and adjuvant radiation, or radiation given with altered fractionation schemes, while effective, incurs long-term morbidity that escalates with treatment intensity and significantly impairs quality of life. Recent trials have suggested that less intensive treatment regimens may achieve similar efficacy with decreased toxicity. In this article, we review the primary strategies used for de-escalation of treatment, which include the reduction of radiation dose, substitution and/or elimination of concurrent radiosensitising chemotherapy, and the use of minimally invasive surgery. We discuss the rationale behind these approaches and the preliminary data demonstrating the success of de-escalation, as well as potential considerations raised by treatment de-intensification in HPV-associated OPSCC.
Extranodal extension (ENE) is a well-established poor prognosticator and an indication for adjuvant treatment escalation in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Identification ...of ENE on pretreatment imaging represents a diagnostic challenge that limits its clinical utility. We previously developed a deep learning algorithm that identifies ENE on pretreatment computed tomography (CT) imaging in patients with HNSCC. We sought to validate our algorithm performance for patients from a diverse set of institutions and compare its diagnostic ability to that of expert diagnosticians.
We obtained preoperative, contrast-enhanced CT scans and corresponding pathology results from two external data sets of patients with HNSCC: an external institution and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) HNSCC imaging data. Lymph nodes were segmented and annotated as ENE-positive or ENE-negative on the basis of pathologic confirmation. Deep learning algorithm performance was evaluated and compared directly to two board-certified neuroradiologists.
A total of 200 lymph nodes were examined in the external validation data sets. For lymph nodes from the external institution, the algorithm achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84 (83.1% accuracy), outperforming radiologists' AUCs of 0.70 and 0.71 (
= .02 and
= .01). Similarly, for lymph nodes from the TCGA, the algorithm achieved an AUC of 0.90 (88.6% accuracy), outperforming radiologist AUCs of 0.60 and 0.82 (
< .0001 and
= .16). Radiologist diagnostic accuracy improved when receiving deep learning assistance.
Deep learning successfully identified ENE on pretreatment imaging across multiple institutions, exceeding the diagnostic ability of radiologists with specialized head and neck experience. Our findings suggest that deep learning has utility in the identification of ENE in patients with HNSCC and has the potential to be integrated into clinical decision making.
Identification of nodal metastasis and tumor extranodal extension (ENE) is crucial for head and neck cancer management, but currently only can be diagnosed via postoperative pathology. Pretreatment, ...radiographic identification of ENE, in particular, has proven extremely difficult for clinicians, but would be greatly influential in guiding patient management. Here, we show that a deep learning convolutional neural network can be trained to identify nodal metastasis and ENE with excellent performance that surpasses what human clinicians have historically achieved. We trained a 3-dimensional convolutional neural network using a dataset of 2,875 CT-segmented lymph node samples with correlating pathology labels, cross-validated and fine-tuned on 124 samples, and conducted testing on a blinded test set of 131 samples. On the blinded test set, the model predicted ENE and nodal metastasis each with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.91 (95%CI: 0.85-0.97). The model has the potential for use as a clinical decision-making tool to help guide head and neck cancer patient management.
OBJECTIVE The aim of this systematic review was to provide an objective summary of the published literature pertaining to the use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) specific to previously ...untreated spinal metastases. METHODS The authors performed a systematic review, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, of the literature found in a search of Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to March 2015. The search strategy was limited to publications in the English language. RESULTS A total of 14 full-text articles were included in the analysis. All studies were retrospective except for 2 studies, which were prospective. A total of 1024 treated spinal lesions were analyzed. The median follow-up time ranged from 9 to 49 months. A range of dose-fractionation schemes was used, the most common of which were 16-24 Gy/1 fraction (fx), 24 Gy/2 fx, 24-27 Gy/3 fx, and 30-35 Gy/5 fx. In studies that reported crude results regarding in-field local tumor control, 346 (85%) of 407 lesions remained controlled. For studies that reported actuarial values, the weighted average revealed a 90% 1-year local control rate. Only 3 studies reported data on complete pain response, and the weighted average of these results yielded a complete pain response rate of 54%. The most common toxicity was new or progressing vertebral compression fracture, which was observed in 9.4% of cases; 2 cases (0.2%) of neurologic injury were reported. CONCLUSION There is a paucity of prospective data specific to SBRT in patients with spinal metastases not otherwise irradiated. This systematic review found that SBRT is associated with favorable rates of local control (approximately 90% at 1 year) and complete pain response (approximately 50%), and low rates of serious adverse events were found. Practice guidelines are summarized based on these data and International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society consensus.
Highlights • SBRT utilization for stage I SCLC has increased over the last decade. • This has occurred despite a lack of national guidelines or data supporting its use. • Radiation dose prescription ...trends mirror that of SBRT in NSCLC. • The role of SBRT for inoperable cT1-2 N0 SCLC requires further research.
Background
Evidence surrounding the effect of adjuvant treatment in salivary gland cancers is limited. The benefit of adding chemotherapy to adjuvant treatment is also of interest. We investigated ...the association of these treatments with survival and whether this differed by stage or the presence of adverse features.
Methods
A retrospective study of adult salivary gland cancer cases diagnosed from 2004 to 2013 in the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was conducted.
Results
Treatment with adjuvant radiotherapy was associated with improved survival for both patients with early‐stage (hazard ratio HR 0.744; P = .004) and late‐stage (HR 0.688; P < .001) disease with adverse features. Further addition of chemotherapy to the adjuvant treatment of patients with late‐stage disease with adverse features was not associated with a survival benefit (HR 1.028; P = .705).
Conclusion
Adjuvant radiotherapy is associated with improved survival for patients with adverse features, regardless of stage. The addition of chemotherapy to the adjuvant treatment of patients with late‐stage disease with adverse features is not associated with improved outcomes.
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) improves complete pain response for painful spinal metastases compared with conventional external beam radiation therapy (cEBRT). We report mature local ...control and reirradiation rates in a large cohort of patients treated with SBRT versus cEBRT enrolled previously in the Canadian Clinical Trials Group Symptom Control 24 phase 2/3 trial.
One hundred thirty-seven of 229 (60%) patients randomized to 24 Gy in 2 SBRT fractions or 20 Gy in 5 cEBRT fractions were retrospectively reviewed. By including all treated spinal segments, we report on 66 patients (119 spine segments) treated with SBRT and 71 patients (169 segments) treated with cEBRT. The primary outcomes were magnetic resonance–based local control and reirradiation rates for each treated spine segment.
The median follow-up was 11.3 months (interquartile range, 5.3-27.7 months), and median overall survival in the SBRT and cEBRT cohorts were 21.6 (95% confidence interval CI, 11.3, upper bound not reached) and 18.9 (95% CI, 12.2-29.1) months (P = .428), respectively. The cohorts were balanced with respect to radioresistant histology and presence of mass (paraspinal and/or epidural disease extension). Risk of local failure after SBRT versus cEBRT at 6, 12, and 24 months were 2.8% (95% CI, 0.8%-7.4%) versus 11.2% (95% CI, 6.9%-16.6%), 6.1% (95% CI, 2.5%-12.1%) versus 28.4% (95% CI, 21.3%-35.9%), and 14.8% (95% CI, 8.2-23.1%) versus 35.6% (95% CI, 27.8%-43.6%), respectively (P < .001). cEBRT (hazard ratio HR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.94-6.25; P < .001) and presence of mass (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.29-3.31; P = .002) independently predicted local failure on multivariable analysis. The 1-year reirradiation rates and median times to reirradiation after SBRT versus cEBRT were 2.2% (95% CI, 0.4-7.0%) versus 15.8% (95% CI, 10.4%-22.3%) (P = .002) and 22.9 months versus 9.5 months, respectively. cEBRT (HR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.27-5.30; P = .009) and radioresistant histology (HR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.12-3.60; P = .020) independently predicted for reirradiation. Eight of 12 iatrogenic vertebral compression fractures were after SBRT and 4 of 12 after cEBRT; grade 3 adverse fracture effects were isolated to the SBRT cohort (5 of 12).
Risk of local failure and reirradiation is lower with SBRT compared with cEBRT for spinal metastases. Although the iatrogenic vertebral compression fracture rates were within expectations, grade 3 vertebral compression fractures were isolated to the SBRT cohort.
Background
Treatment at high‐volume surgical facilities (HVSFs) provides a survival benefit for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs); however, it is unknown what role ...postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) plays in achieving the improved outcomes.
Methods
From the National Cancer Database, 6844 patients with locally advanced invasive HNSCCs of the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx who underwent definitive surgery with PORT between 2004 and 2013 were identified. HVSFs were those in the top percentile for annual case volume during this period.
Results
The median follow‐up was 54 months. Compared with a lower volume surgical facility (LVSF), an HVSF improved 5‐year overall survival (OS; 57.7% at HVSFs vs 52.5% at LVSFs; P = .0003). Overall, 31.6% of the patients changed their radiation therapy (RT) facility after surgery, with this being more common at HVSFs (39.1% vs 28.9% at LVSFs; P < .001). Among those patients undergoing surgery at an HVSF, remaining at the same facility for RT improved 5‐year OS (63.1% vs 49.3% with a facility change; P < .0001). A propensity score–matched cohort of patients treated at HVSFs confirmed the improved 5‐year OS when patients remained at the treating HVSF for RT (59.2% vs 50.7% with a facility change; P = .005). In a multivariate analysis, treatment at an HVSF and remaining there for RT resulted in a reduced hazard of death (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.69‐0.94; P = .006).
Conclusions
The survival benefit associated with HVSFs persists only when patients remain at the facility for RT, and this suggests that facility specialization and/or high‐volume PORT may assist in driving the OS improvement.
Treatment with postoperative radiation therapy at the same facility where high‐volume surgery is performed provides a survival benefit for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Switching to an outside radiation facility for postoperative radiation therapy significantly diminishes 5‐year overall survival and is comparable to receiving treatment at a lower volume surgical facility.
PDF
