Literature DB >> 25902372

Treatment Outcomes for T4 Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Joseph Zenga1, Michael Wilson2, Douglas R Adkins3, Hiram A Gay4, Bruce H Haughey1, Dorina Kallogjeri1, Loren S Michel3, Randal C Paniello1, Jason T Rich1, Wade L Thorstad4, Brian Nussenbaum1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Little is known about treatment outcomes for T4 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC), particularly in the era of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related disease.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate oncologic outcomes for T4 OPSCC treated with primary surgical and nonsurgical therapies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study of 131 patients from a single academic hospital, who were treated for T4a or T4b OPSCC (with any N stage and without distant metastatic disease at presentation) between 1998 and 2012 and had a minimum 2-year follow-up (the median follow-up time was 34.6 months). This study was conducted between January 1, 1998, and November 1, 2012.
INTERVENTIONS: Sixty-nine patients underwent nonsurgical therapy, 47 (68%) of whom had p16-positive tumors. Nonsurgical treatment paradigms included induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (n = 36 [54%]), concurrent chemoradiotherapy (n = 29 [43%]), and induction chemotherapy followed by radiation therapy alone (n = 2 [3%]). Sixty-two patients underwent surgical treatment, 50 (81%) of whom had p16-positive tumors. Fifty-seven surgical patients (92%) received adjuvant therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures included disease-specific survival (DSS), disease-free survival (DFS), 2-year gastrostomy and tracheostomy tube rates, and major complication rates.
RESULTS: Significant baseline differences between the surgical vs nonsurgical groups included age (mean 59.8 vs 55.4 years [P = .005]), sex (male, 95% vs 84% [P = .04]), body mass index (<18.5 [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared], 3% vs 16% [P = .02]), and smoking history of 10 or more pack-years (48% vs 77% [P = .003]). For p16-positive patients, Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS, DSS, and DFS were significantly higher for surgically treated patients than for the nonsurgical group (χ(2)(1) = 7.335 for log-rank P = .007, χ(2)(1) = 8.607 for log-rank P = .003, and χ(2)(1) = 7.763 for log-rank P = .005, respectively). For p16-negative patients, Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS and DSS were higher for the surgical group but did not reach statistical significance (χ(2)(1) = 2.649 for log-rank P = .10 and χ(2)(1) = 2.077 for log-rank P = .15, respectively), while estimates of DFS were significantly higher for patients treated with primary surgery (χ(2)(1)= 3.869 for log-rank P = .049. In a multivariable Cox survival analysis, p16-positive immunohistochemical status had a significant positive association with OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.95 [P = .03]), DSS (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.22-0.92 [P = .03]), and DFS (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.95 [P = .03]), and nonsurgical treatment had a significant negative association with OS (HR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.51-5.16 [P = .001]), DSS (HR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.59-7.16 [P = .002]), and DFS (HR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.51-4.45 [P = .001]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Primary surgical treatment may be associated with improved outcomes in patients with T4 OPSCC. p16 Immunohistochemical status remains a strong prognostic indicator even in patients with locally advanced disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25902372     DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2015.0764

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 2168-6181            Impact factor:   6.223


  11 in total

1.  Treatment selection in oropharyngeal cancer: a surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) patterns of care analysis.

Authors:  Nitin A Pagedar; Catherine Chioreso; Jennifer A Schlichting; Charles F Lynch; Mary E Charlton
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 2.506

2.  Survival analysis of 287 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients in a single institution: a retrospective comparison of two consecutive time intervals with surgical and conservative treatment approaches.

Authors:  Adrian Münscher; Lara Bussmann; Susanne Sehner; Simon Knaack; Alexandra Gliese; Silke Tribius; Till Clauditz; Balazs B Lörincz
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-05-29       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Predictors of swallow function after transoral surgery for locally advanced oropharyngeal cancer.

Authors:  Jennifer H Gross; Melanie Townsend; Helena Y Hong; Emily Miller; Dorina Kallogjeri; Joseph Zenga; Patrik Pipkorn; Ryan S Jackson; Bruce Haughey; Jason T Rich
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2019-04-07       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Pathology-based staging for HPV-positive squamous carcinoma of the oropharynx.

Authors:  B H Haughey; P Sinha; D Kallogjeri; R L Goldberg; J S Lewis; J F Piccirillo; R S Jackson; E J Moore; M Brandwein-Gensler; S J Magnuson; W R Carroll; T M Jones; M D Wilkie; A Lau; N S Upile; Jon Sheard; J Lancaster; S Tandon; M Robinson; D Husband; I Ganly; J P Shah; D M Brizel; B O'Sullivan; J A Ridge; W M Lydiatt
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 5.337

5.  The Hybrid Transoral-Pharyngotomy Approach to Oropharyngeal Carcinoma: Technique and Outcome.

Authors:  Parul Sinha; Patrik Pipkorn; Joseph Zenga; Bruce H Haughey
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 1.547

6.  De-intensified adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemoradiotherapy post transoral minimally invasive surgery for resectable HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  James Howard; Raghav C Dwivedi; Liam Masterson; Prasad Kothari; Harry Quon; F Christopher Holsinger
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-12-14

Review 7.  Current Role of Surgery in the Management of Oropharyngeal Cancer.

Authors:  Wojciech Golusiński; Ewelina Golusińska-Kardach
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  Flap Reconstruction of the Oropharyngeal Defect After Tumor Resection via Combined Transcervical and Transoral Approach in Patients With HPV-Positive and -Negative Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Jiaming Chen; Jugao Fang; Qi Zhong; Ling Feng; Shizhi He; Hongzhi Ma; Lizhen Hou; Meng Lian; Ru Wang; Xixi Shen; Yifan Yang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 6.244

9.  Metastatic HPV-related oropharyngeal carcinoma cured with chemoradiotherapy: importance of pretherapy biomolecular assessment.

Authors:  Francesco Perri; Francesco Longo; Giuseppina Della Vittoria Scarpati; Salvatore Pisconti; Vito Longo; Raffaele Addeo; Fabio Carducci; Carlo Buonerba; Franco Fulciniti; Raffaele Solla
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2017-11-24

Review 10.  Transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal cancer: patient selection and special considerations.

Authors:  R Michael Baskin; Brian J Boyce; Robert Amdur; William M Mendenhall; Kathryn Hitchcock; Natalie Silver; Peter T Dziegielewski
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2018-04-20       Impact factor: 3.989

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.