Literature DB >> 12966507

Quality of life in patients with oropharynx carcinomas: assessment after accelerated radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy versus radical surgery and postoperative radiotherapy.

Abdelkarim S Allal1, Kevin Nicoucar, Nicolas Mach, Pavel Dulguerov.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In oropharyngeal carcinomas, it is assumed that the effectiveness of the different treatment approaches is roughly equivalent, whereas the functional outcome after radical radiotherapy (RT) is superior to that associated with primary surgery. The aim of this study is to assess quality of life (QoL) outcomes of patients after two treatment strategies: radical surgery with postoperative RT and accelerated concomitant boost RT with or without chemotherapy.
METHODS: Sixty patients who were disease free at least 1 year after treatment of oropharynx carcinoma were studied. Forty had been treated with radical RT (median tumor dose, 69.9 Gy in 5.5 weeks), and 20 had been treated with primary surgery and postoperative monofractionated RT (median dose, 60.2 Gy). Seven of the former patients received chemotherapy concomitantly with, and one before, RT. Functional outcome was assessed by the subjective Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck cancer (PSSHN) and the general QoL by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core QoL questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). The unpaired t test was used to assess for significant differences between means.
RESULTS: By use of the PSSHN module, scores were generally higher in the RT group, with a significant difference in the speech subscale (p =.005), a trend for a significant difference for the eating in public subscale (p =.08), and an insignificant difference for the normalcy of diet subscale (p =.25). When analyzed by tumor stage, no significant differences were observed for T1-2 tumors, whereas for patients with T3-4 tumors highly significant differences favoring the RT group became evident for all three subscales. Although no significant differences were observed using the EORTC QLQ C-30 functional scales, patients treated with primary surgery reported significantly more dyspnea (28 vs 12, p =.04) and appetite loss (30 vs 13, p =.05). In patients with T3-4 tumors, trends toward better scores favoring the RT group were observed for physical, role, emotional, and social functions, as well as a significantly better score for pain symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS: Although for early stages no clear advantage in QoL outcome was noted for the RT group compared with the surgery group, for advanced-stage disease an advantage favoring radical RT seemed apparent. For those patients, if an equivalency between the two treatment strategies could be assumed regarding oncologic results, then nonsurgical treatment should be considered the preferred option. Copyright 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12966507     DOI: 10.1002/hed.10302

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Head Neck        ISSN: 1043-3074            Impact factor:   3.147


  20 in total

1.  [Transoral resection of locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the side wall of the oropharynx: multimodal treatment concepts in transition].

Authors:  C Simon; P K Plinkert
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 2.  Surgical Options for Locally Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer.

Authors:  Hannan A Qureshi; Marianne Abouyared; Brittany Barber; Jeffrey J Houlton
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2019-04-01

Review 3.  Head and neck cancer: an evolving treatment paradigm.

Authors:  David M Cognetti; Randal S Weber; Stephen Y Lai
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Endpoints and cutpoints in head and neck oncology trials: methodical background, challenges, current practice and perspectives.

Authors:  Marcus Hezel; Kathrin von Usslar; Thiemo Kurzweg; Balazs B Lörincz; Rainald Knecht
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 5.  Head and neck cancer pain: systematic review of prevalence and associated factors.

Authors:  Tatiana V Macfarlane; Tanja Wirth; Sriyani Ranasinghe; Kim W Ah-See; Nick Renny; David Hurman
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2012-04-01

6.  The impact of radiation caries in the quality of life of head and neck cancer patients.

Authors:  Mariana de Pauli Paglioni; Natalia Rangel Palmier; Ana Carolina Prado-Ribeiro; Eduardo Rodrigues Fregnani; Maria Beatriz Duarte Gavião; Thaís Bianca Brandão; Marcio Ajudarte Lopes; Ana Paula Dias Ribeiro; Cesar Augusto Migliorati; Alan Roger Santos-Silva
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Treatment trends in head and neck cancer: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Patterns of Care analysis.

Authors:  Jennifer A Schlichting; Nitin A Pagedar; Catherine Chioreso; Charles F Lynch; Mary E Charlton
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 2.506

Review 8.  Functional outcomes and rehabilitation strategies in patients treated with chemoradiotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lisette van der Molen; Maya A van Rossum; Lori M Burkhead; Ludi E Smeele; Frans J M Hilgers
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  Treatment Outcomes and Quality of Life in Oropharyngeal Cancer after Surgery-based versus Radiation-based Treatment.

Authors:  Tae Wook Kim; Hye-Youn Youm; Hayoung Byun; Young-Ik Son; Chung-Hwan Baek
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 3.372

Review 10.  Current trends in initial management of oropharyngeal cancer: the declining use of open surgery.

Authors:  Missak Haigentz; Carl E Silver; June Corry; Eric M Genden; Robert P Takes; Alessandra Rinaldo; Alfio Ferlito
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.