BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In recent years, various therapeutic concepts have been developed for treating oral cancer, these include preoperative simultaneous "neoadjuvant" radio-chemotherapy and one-stage-surgery with tumour ablation and reconstruction. When considering long-term survival, there is substantial evidence that the neoadjuvant therapy is superior to the primary surgical approach with postoperative radiation. Both treatment concepts, however, have a strong impact on the quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study prospectively evaluates and compares quality of life in 53 patients with oral cancer treated according to a neoadjuvant concept or primarily surgically, using the questionnaires QLQ C-30 and H and N35 by the EORTC. RESULTS: Initially both groups showed a marked reduction in the quality of life. Despite a clear improvement in the first postoperative year baseline values were not reached in most of the scores. Specific long-lasting impairments in the symptom scales concerning oral functions were found in both treatment arms. In the neoadjuvant therapy group, however, especially global health and the emotional status were reduced to a higher degree than in the other group. This was particularly noticeable in the early treatment phase. CONCLUSIONS: Following an initial deterioration of quality-of-life after 3 months a gradual improvement of physical and psychological function was observed in the course of the first post-treatment year in both groups. Severe side effects can be observed. These side effects vary strongly in their individual expression. Limitations in the quality of life can be justified, if the more aggressive therapy resulted in a better disease free survival.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In recent years, various therapeutic concepts have been developed for treating oral cancer, these include preoperative simultaneous "neoadjuvant" radio-chemotherapy and one-stage-surgery with tumour ablation and reconstruction. When considering long-term survival, there is substantial evidence that the neoadjuvant therapy is superior to the primary surgical approach with postoperative radiation. Both treatment concepts, however, have a strong impact on the quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study prospectively evaluates and compares quality of life in 53 patients with oral cancer treated according to a neoadjuvant concept or primarily surgically, using the questionnaires QLQ C-30 and H and N35 by the EORTC. RESULTS: Initially both groups showed a marked reduction in the quality of life. Despite a clear improvement in the first postoperative year baseline values were not reached in most of the scores. Specific long-lasting impairments in the symptom scales concerning oral functions were found in both treatment arms. In the neoadjuvant therapy group, however, especially global health and the emotional status were reduced to a higher degree than in the other group. This was particularly noticeable in the early treatment phase. CONCLUSIONS: Following an initial deterioration of quality-of-life after 3 months a gradual improvement of physical and psychological function was observed in the course of the first post-treatment year in both groups. Severe side effects can be observed. These side effects vary strongly in their individual expression. Limitations in the quality of life can be justified, if the more aggressive therapy resulted in a better disease free survival.
Authors: Raghav C Dwivedi; Suzanne St Rose; Edward J Chisholm; Pouya Youssefi; Mohammed Sultan Ul Hassan; Afroze S Khan; Behrad Elmiyeh; Cyrus J Kerawala; Peter M Clarke; Christopher M Nutting; Peter H Rhys-Evans; Kevin J Harrington; Rehan Kazi Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2011-05-07 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Thomas M Atkinson; Angela M Stover; Daniel F Storfer; Rebecca M Saracino; Thomas A D'Agostino; Denise Pergolizzi; Konstantina Matsoukas; Yuelin Li; Ethan Basch Journal: Epidemiol Rev Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Benedicta E Beck-Broichsitter; Jörn Huck; Thomas Küchler; Daniela Hauke; Jürgen Hedderich; Jörg Wiltfang; Stephan T Becker Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Pepijn A Borggreven; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Martin J Muller; Milou L C H Heiligers; Remco de Bree; Neil K Aaronson; C René Leemans Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2007-02-02 Impact factor: 2.503