Randomized Trial of Radiotherapy Versus Transoral Robotic Surgery for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Long-Term Results of the ORATOR Trial.

Purpose: The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has risen rapidly, because of an epidemic of human papillomavirus infection. The optimal management of early-stage OPSCC with surgery or radiation continues to be a clinical controversy. Long-term randomized data comparing these paradigms are lacking.
Methods: We randomly assigned patients with T1-T2, N0-2 (≤ 4 cm) OPSCC to radiotherapy (RT) (with chemotherapy if N1-2) versus transoral robotic surgery plus neck dissection (TORS + ND) (with or without adjuvant therapy). The primary end point was swallowing quality of life (QOL) at 1-year using the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory. Secondary end points included adverse events, other QOL outcomes, overall survival, and progression-free survival. All analyses were intention-to-treat. Herein, we present long-term outcomes from the trial.
Results: Sixty-eight patients were randomly assigned (n = 34 per arm) between August 10, 2012, and June 9, 2017. Median follow-up was 45 months. Longitudinal MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory analyses demonstrated statistical superiority of RT arm over time ( P = .049), although the differences beyond 1 year were of smaller magnitude than at the 1-year timepoint (year 2: 86.0 ± 13.5 in the RT arm v 84.8 ± 12.5 in the TORS + ND arm, P = .74; year 3: 88.9 ± 11.3 v 83.3 ± 13.9, P = .12). These differences did not meet the threshold to qualify as a clinically meaningful change at any timepoint. Certain differences in QOL concerns including more pain and dental concerns in the TORS + ND arm seen at 1 year resolved at 2 and 3 years; however, TORS patients started to use more nutritional supplements at 3 years ( P = .015). Dry mouth scores were higher in RT patients over time ( P = .041).
Conclusion: On longitudinal analysis, the swallowing QOL difference between primary RT and TORS + ND approaches persists but decreases over time. Patients with OPSCC should be informed about the pros and cons of both treatment options (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01590355).
Competing Interests: Anthony C. NicholsResearch Funding: Novartis Canada Pharmaceuticals Inc (Inst) Eric BertheletResearch Funding: Eisai Eric WinquistConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Bayer, Eisai, Amgen, Roche, IpsenResearch Funding: Roche/Genentech (Inst), Merck (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Eisai (Inst), Ayala Pharmaceuticals (Inst) David A. PalmaThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Employment: London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: US patent: a method for analyzing a three-dimensional computed tomography image, US patent application no. 61/896349 (not licensed, no commercial or financial impact)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.