Search

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.

Purpose The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) produced an evidence-based guideline on radiation therapy in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) that was determined to be relevant to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership. After applying standard critical appraisal policy and endorsement procedures, ASCO chose to endorse the ASTRO guideline. Methods The ASTRO guideline was reviewed by ASCO content experts for clinical accuracy and by ASCO methodologists for developmental rigor. On favorable review, an ASCO Expert Panel was convened to review the guideline contents and recommendations. The ASCO guideline approval body, the Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee, approved the final endorsement. Results The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the ASTRO guideline recommendations, published in July 2017, are clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorsed the ASTRO guideline and added minor qualifying statements. Recommendations Recommendations for the addition of systemic therapy to definitive radiotherapy in the treatment of OPSCC, postoperative radiotherapy with and without systemic therapy following primary surgery of OPSCC, induction chemotherapy in the treatment of OPSCC, and the appropriate dose, fractionation, and volume regimens with and without systemic therapy in the treatment of OPSCC are outlined for a variety of disease stages and clinical scenarios. ASCO Endorsement Panel qualifying statements and minor modifications were made to the ASTRO recommendations. The staging system that is referenced in these guidelines is the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edition. Additional information is available at: www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Purpose: We conducted a retrospective evaluation of the IMCL-9815 study to examine the association of human papillomavirus (HPV) and p16 protein expression status with outcomes in patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) receiving radiotherapy (RT) plus cetuximab or RT alone., Patients and Methods: In the IMCL-9815 study, patients were randomly allocated to receive RT plus weekly cetuximab or RT alone. A subpopulation of patients with p16-evaluable OPC was retrospectively evaluated on the basis of locoregional control (LRC), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Evaluable samples from patients with p16-positive OPC were also tested for HPV DNA., Results: Tumor p16 status was evaluable in 182 patients with OPC enrolled in the IMCL-9815 study; 41% were p16 positive. When treated with RT alone or RT plus cetuximab, p16-positive patients had a longer OS than p16-negative patients (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.74 and hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.36, respectively). The addition of cetuximab to RT increased LRC, OS, and PFS in both patients with p16-positive OPC and those with p16-negative disease. Interaction tests for LRC, OS, and PFS did not demonstrate any significant interaction between p16 status and treatment effect (P = .087, .085, and .253, respectively). Similar trends were observed when patients with p16-positive/HPV-positive OPC (n = 49) and those with p16-positive/HPV-negative OPC (n = 14) were compared., Conclusion: p16 status was strongly prognostic for patients with OPC. The data suggest that the addition of cetuximab to RT improved clinical outcomes regardless of p16 or HPV status versus RT alone., Competing Interests: Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receive treatment at centers with expertise, but whether provider experience affects survival is unknown., Patients and Methods: The effect of institutional experience on overall survival (OS) in patients with stage III or IV HNC was investigated within a randomized trial of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG 0129), which compared cisplatin concurrent with standard versus accelerated fractionation radiotherapy. As a surrogate for experience, institutions were classified as historically low- (HLACs) or high-accruing centers (HHACs) based on accrual to 21 RTOG HNC trials (1997 to 2002). The effect of accrual volume on OS was estimated by Cox proportional hazards models., Results: Median RTOG accrual (1997 to 2002) at HLACs was four versus 65 patients at HHACs. Analysis included 471 patients in RTOG 0129 (2002 to 2005) with known human papillomavirus and smoking status. Patients at HLACs versus HHACs had better performance status (0: 62% v 52%; P = .04) and lower T stage (T4: 26.5% v 35.3%; P = .002) but were otherwise similar. Radiotherapy protocol deviations were higher at HLACs versus HHACs (18% v 6%; P < .001). When compared with HHACs, patients at HLACs had worse OS (5 years: 51.0% v 69.1%; P = .002). Treatment at HLACs was associated with increased death risk of 91% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.91; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.65) after adjustment for prognostic factors and 72% (HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.40) after radiotherapy compliance adjustment., Conclusion: OS is worse for patients with HNC treated at HLACs versus HHACs to cooperative group trials after accounting for radiotherapy protocol deviations. Institutional experience substantially influences survival in locally advanced HNC., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: We tested the efficacy and toxicity of cisplatin plus accelerated fractionation with a concomitant boost (AFX-C) versus standard fractionation (SFX) in locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (LA-HNC)., Patients and Methods: Patients had stage III to IV carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx. Radiation therapy schedules were 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 7 weeks (SFX) or 72 Gy in 42 fractions over 6 weeks (AFX-C). Cisplatin doses were 100 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks for two (AFX-C) or three (SFX) cycles. Toxicities were scored by using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria 2.0 and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier method and were compared by using the one-sided log-rank test. Locoregional failure (LRF) and distant metastasis (DM) rates were estimated by using the cumulative incidence method and Gray's test., Results: In all, 721 of 743 patients were analyzable (361, SFX; 360, AFX-C). At a median follow-up of 7.9 years (range, 0.3 to 10.1 years) for 355 surviving patients, no differences were observed in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.18; P = .37; 8-year survival, 48% v 48%), PFS (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.24; P = .52; 8-year estimate, 42% v 41%), LRF (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.38; P = .78; 8-year estimate, 37% v 39%), or DM (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.24; P = .16; 8-year estimate, 15% v 13%). For oropharyngeal cancer, p16-positive patients had better OS than p16-negative patients (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.42; P < .001; 8-year survival, 70.9% v 30.2%). There were no statistically significant differences in the grade 3 to 5 acute or late toxicities between the two arms and p-16 status., Conclusion: When combined with cisplatin, AFX-C neither improved outcome nor increased late toxicity in patients with LA-HNC. Long-term high survival rates in p16-positive patients with oropharyngeal cancer support the ongoing efforts to explore deintensification., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)