Michael T Spiotto1, Gina Jefferson2, Barry Wenig2, Michael Markiewicz3, Ralph R Weichselbaum1, Matthew Koshy1. 1. Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois2Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System, Chicago. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System, Chicago. 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System, Chicago.
Abstract
Importance: Because locally advanced oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC) is often treated with surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy (S+PORT), the effectiveness of organ preservation with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) remains unclear. Objective: To compare the differences in survival between patients with locally advanced OCSCC treated with S+PORT or CRT. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using the National Cancer Database, this study compared 6900 patients with stage III to IVA OCSCC treated with S+PORT and CRT from 2004 through 2012 at academic and community-based cancer clinics. Comparisons were made using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards regression models using the entire cohort and a propensity score-matched cohort of 2286 patients. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival (OS). Results: Of the 6900 study patients, 4809 received S+PORT (3080 male [64.0%] and 1792 [36.0%] female) and 2091 received CRT (1453 male [69.5%] and 638 [30.5%] female). Median follow-up for the entire group was 23.0 months overall but was shorter for patients receiving CRT (17.3-month) vs S+PORT (25.6 months). Patients receiving CRT were more likely to be older than 60 years, treated before 2007, live within 10 miles of the treating facility, treated at nonacademic centers, have more comorbidities, have T3 to T4a tumors, and have N2a to N2c nodal disease. Propensity score matching identified cohorts of patients with similar clinical variables. S+PORT was associated with improved survival among all patients (3-year OS: 53.9% for S+PORT vs 37.8% for CRT; difference = 16.1%; 95% CI, 13.6%-18.6%) and in the propensity score-matched cohort (3-year OS: 51.8% for S+PORT vs 39.3% for CRT; difference = 11.9%; 95% CI, 7.8%-16.0%). S+PORT was associated with improved survival among patients with T3 to T4a tumors (3-year OS: 49.7% for S+PORT vs 36.0% for CRT; difference = 16.1%; 95% CI, 13.6%-18.6%) but was not associated with improved survival among patients with T1 to T2 tumors (3-year OS: 59.1% for S+PORT vs 53.5% for CRT; difference = 5.6%; 95% CI, -3.1% to 14.3%). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with CRT, S+PORT was associated with improved survival for locally advanced OCSCCs, especially in T3 to T4a disease. These data support the use of surgery as the initial treatment modality for operable OCSCCs.
Importance: Because locally advanced oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC) is often treated with surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy (S+PORT), the effectiveness of organ preservation with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) remains unclear. Objective: To compare the differences in survival between patients with locally advanced OCSCC treated with S+PORT or CRT. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using the National Cancer Database, this study compared 6900 patients with stage III to IVA OCSCC treated with S+PORT and CRT from 2004 through 2012 at academic and community-based cancer clinics. Comparisons were made using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards regression models using the entire cohort and a propensity score-matched cohort of 2286 patients. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival (OS). Results: Of the 6900 study patients, 4809 received S+PORT (3080 male [64.0%] and 1792 [36.0%] female) and 2091 received CRT (1453 male [69.5%] and 638 [30.5%] female). Median follow-up for the entire group was 23.0 months overall but was shorter for patients receiving CRT (17.3-month) vs S+PORT (25.6 months). Patients receiving CRT were more likely to be older than 60 years, treated before 2007, live within 10 miles of the treating facility, treated at nonacademic centers, have more comorbidities, have T3 to T4a tumors, and have N2a to N2c nodal disease. Propensity score matching identified cohorts of patients with similar clinical variables. S+PORT was associated with improved survival among all patients (3-year OS: 53.9% for S+PORT vs 37.8% for CRT; difference = 16.1%; 95% CI, 13.6%-18.6%) and in the propensity score-matched cohort (3-year OS: 51.8% for S+PORT vs 39.3% for CRT; difference = 11.9%; 95% CI, 7.8%-16.0%). S+PORT was associated with improved survival among patients with T3 to T4a tumors (3-year OS: 49.7% for S+PORT vs 36.0% for CRT; difference = 16.1%; 95% CI, 13.6%-18.6%) but was not associated with improved survival among patients with T1 to T2 tumors (3-year OS: 59.1% for S+PORT vs 53.5% for CRT; difference = 5.6%; 95% CI, -3.1% to 14.3%). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with CRT, S+PORT was associated with improved survival for locally advanced OCSCCs, especially in T3 to T4a disease. These data support the use of surgery as the initial treatment modality for operable OCSCCs.
Authors: Aaron W Pederson; Joseph K Salama; Mary Ellen Witt; Kerstin M Stenson; Elizabeth A Blair; Everett E Vokes; Daniel J Haraf Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Megan E Daly; Quynh-Thu Le; Margaret M Kozak; Peter G Maxim; James D Murphy; Annie Hsu; Billy W Loo; Michael J Kaplan; Nancy J Fischbein; Daniel T Chang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-08-02 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Gregory T Wolf; Susan Gross Fisher; Waun Ki Hong; Robert Hillman; Monica Spaulding; George E Laramore; James W Endicott; Kenneth McClatchey; William G Henderson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-06-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Pepijn A Borggreven; Irma Verdonck-de Leeuw; Rico N Rinkel; Johannes A Langendijk; Jan C Roos; Eric F L David; Remco de Bree; C René Leemans Journal: Head Neck Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: David J Sher; Vijaya Thotakura; Tracy A Balboni; Charles M Norris; Robert I Haddad; Marshall R Posner; Jochen Lorch; Laura A Goguen; Donald J Annino; Roy B Tishler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-04-29 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Daniel R Gomez; Joanne E Zhung; Jennifer Gomez; Kelvin Chan; Abraham J Wu; Suzanne L Wolden; David G Pfister; Ashok Shaha; Jatin P Shah; Dennis H Kraus; Richard J Wong; Nancy Y Lee Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Kerstin M Stenson; Rangesh Kunnavakkam; Ezra E W Cohen; Louis D Portugal; Elizabeth Blair; Daniel J Haraf; Joseph Salama; Everett E Vokes Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Shlomo A Koyfman; Nofisat Ismaila; Doug Crook; Anil D'Cruz; Cristina P Rodriguez; David J Sher; Damian Silbermins; Erich M Sturgis; Terance T Tsue; Jared Weiss; Sue S Yom; F Christopher Holsinger Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-02-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Muntazir Hussain; Muhammad Faisal; Muhammad Abu Bakar; Tahir Muhammad; Saman Qadeer; Sameen Mohtasham; Raza Hussain; Arif Jamshed Journal: Ann Maxillofac Surg Date: 2020-06-08
Authors: Sarah Schimansky; Samantha Lang; Rhona Beynon; Christopher Penfold; Amy Davies; Andrea Waylen; Steve Thomas; Miranda Pring; Michael Pawlita; Tim Waterboer; Andy Ness Journal: Head Neck Date: 2018-12-14 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Adetokunbo Obayemi; Jennifer R Cracchiolo; Jocelyn C Migliacci; Qasim Husain; Rahmatullah Rahmati; Benjamin R Roman; Marc A Cohen Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2019-09-23 Impact factor: 3.454