Search

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is well known as a serious health problem worldwide, especially in low-income countries or those with limited resources, such as most countries in Latin America. International guidelines cannot always be applied to a population from a large region with specific conditions. This study established a Latin American guideline for care of patients with head and neck cancer and presented evidence of HNSCC management considering availability and oncologic benefit. A panel composed of 41 head and neck cancer experts systematically worked according to a modified Delphi process on (1) document compilation of evidence-based answers to different questions contextualized by resource availability and oncologic benefit regarding Latin America (region of limited resources and/or without access to all necessary health care system infrastructure), (2) revision of the answers and the classification of levels of evidence and degrees of recommendations of all recommendations, (3) validation of the consensus through two rounds of online surveys, and (4) manuscript composition. The consensus consists of 12 sections: Head and neck cancer staging, Histopathologic evaluation of head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-oral cavity, Clinical oncology-oral cavity, Head and neck surgery-oropharynx, Clinical oncology-oropharynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-reconstruction and rehabilitation, and Radiation therapy. The present consensus established 48 recommendations on HNSCC patient care considering the availability of resources and focusing on oncologic benefit. These recommendations could also be used to formulate strategies in other regions like Latin America countries.

Background: The treatment of glottic cancer remains challenging, especially with regard to morbidity reduction and larynx preservation rates. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has published guidelines to aid decision-making about this treatment according to the tumor site, clinical stage, and patient medical status., Aim: The present review was conducted to identify changes in the NCCN guidelines for glottic cancer treatment made between 2011 and 2022 and to describe the published evidence concerning glottic cancer treatment and oncological outcomes in the same time period., Methods and Results: Clinical practice guidelines for head and neck cancer published from 2011 up to 2022 were obtained from the NCCN website (www.NCCN.org). Data on glottic cancer treatment recommendations were extracted, and descriptive analysis was performed. In addition, a review of literature registered in the PubMed database was performed to obtain data on glottic cancer management protocols and treatment outcomes from randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published from 2011 to 2022. In total, 24 NCCN guidelines and updates and 68 relevant studies included in the PubMed database were identified. The main guideline changes made pertained to surgical and systemic therapies, the consideration of adverse features, and new options for the treatment of metastatic disease at initial presentation. Early-stage glottic cancer received the most research attention, with transoral endoscopic laser surgery and radiotherapy assessed and compared as the main treatment modalities. Reported associations between treatment types and survival rates for this stage of glottic cancer appear to be similar, but functional outcomes can be highly compromised., Conclusion: NCCN panel members provide updated recommendations based on currently accepted treatment approaches for glottic cancer, constantly reviewing new surgical and non-surgical techniques. The guidelines support decision-making about glottic cancer treatment that should be individualized and prioritize patients' quality of life, functionality, and preferences., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The rates of laryngeal preservation according to therapeutic modality in patients with initial laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) are still controversial. This study evaluated the rates of laryngeal preservation in patients who underwent treatment with surgery or radiotherapy., Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated 151 patients with stage I or II LSCC. Ninety-six patients were matched using a propensity-score and outcomes were compared within this group., Results: Regarding overall, cancer-specific survival and larynx preservation, no differences were observed according to the therapeutic modalities, but patients who underwent radiotherapy had a higher rate of local recurrence than those who underwent surgery. Patients classified as ASA 3 or 4 and treated with radiotherapy showed a tendency of higher risk of larynx loss., Conclusions: Patients with stage I or II laryngeal tumours can be submitted to surgery or radiotherapy with similar rates of laryngeal preservation., (Copyright © 2021 Società Italiana di Otorinolaringoiatria e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale, Rome, Italy.)

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the clinical value of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) after the first cycle of induction chemotherapy (IC) in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN)., Methods and Findings: A prospective, single-arm, single center study was performed, with patients enrolled between February 2010 and July 2013.Patients (n = 49) with stage III/IVA-B LASCCHN who underwent IC with taxanes, cisplatin, and fluorouracil were recruited. Staging procedures included loco-regional and chest imaging, endoscopic examination, and PET/CT scan. On day 14 of the first cycle, a second PET/CT scan was performed. Patients with no early increase in regional lymph node maximum 18F-FDG standard uptake value (SUV), detected using 18F-FDG PET/CT after first IC had better progression-free survival (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.18, 95%, confidence interval (CI) 0.056-0.585; p = 0.004) and overall survival (HR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.040-0.498; p = 0.002), and were considered responders. In this subgroup, patients who achieved a reduction of ≥ 45% maximum primary tumor SUV experienced improved progression-free (HR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.062-0.854; p = 0.028) and overall (HR = 0.11, 95% CI 0.013-0.96; p = 0.046) survival., Conclusions: These results suggest a potential role for early response evaluation with PET/CT examination in patients with LASCCHN undergoing IC. Increased regional lymph node maximum SUV and insufficient decrease in primary tumor uptake predict poorer outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Quality assessment is a major tool for evaluation of health care delivery. In head and neck surgery, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (MD Anderson) has defined quality standards by publishing benchmarks., Methods: We conducted an analysis of 360 head and neck surgeries performed at the AC Camargo Cancer Center (AC Camargo). The procedures were stratified into low-acuity procedures (LAPs) or high-acuity procedures (HAPs) and outcome indicators where compared to MD Anderson benchmarks., Results: In the 360 cases, there were 332 LAPs (92.2%) and 28 HAPs (7.8%). Patients with any comorbid condition had a higher incidence of negative outcome indicators (p = .005). In the LAPs, we achieved the MD Anderson benchmarks in all outcome indicators. In HAPs, the rate of surgical site infection and length of hospital stay were higher than what is established by the benchmarks., Conclusion: Quality assessment of head and neck surgery is possible and should be disseminated, improving effectiveness in health care delivery. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: 1002-1007, 2016., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)