Zhen Yu1, Lei Yu1, Xiaohong Chen2, Xingguo Yang1, Baoxun Zhang1, Tao Yu1, Xin Du1. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100730, China. 2. Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100730, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) of the head and neck often develops lung metastasis. At present, there are not many research reports on ACC lung metastasis, little is known about its exact clinical features and treatment results, and there is no consensus on the best treatment strategy. This study explored the effective treatment strategies, clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis of head and neck ACC lung metastases. METHODS: The clinical and follow-up data of 76 patients with head and neck ACC lung metastases were retrospectively analyzed. According to the initial treatment of patients, they are divided into 4 groups: surgery, surgery+chemotherapy or radiotherapy, chemotherapy or radiotherapy and supportive treatment. The patients were staged according to the International Registry of Lung Metastases Staging System (IRLM). Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test were used to compare the statistical differences of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with different treatment methods and different IRLM stages. RESULTS: The OS and PFS of patients undergoing surgery are better than those of supportive therapy or radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy (OS: P<0.000,1; PFS: P<0.000,1). The OS and PFS of patients with low stage IRLM are better than those with high stage (OS: P<0.000,1; PFS: P<0.000,1). Patients with single lung metastasis and without pleural effusion have better OS and PFS. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term prognosis of patients with lung metastasis of head and neck ACC who undergo surgery is better than other treatments, which is related to higher OS and PFS. For patients with ACC lung metastases who are operationally eligible, the significance of complete surgical resection should be higher than other treatment options.
BACKGROUND: Adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) of the head and neck often develops lung metastasis. At present, there are not many research reports on ACC lung metastasis, little is known about its exact clinical features and treatment results, and there is no consensus on the best treatment strategy. This study explored the effective treatment strategies, clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis of head and neck ACC lung metastases. METHODS: The clinical and follow-up data of 76 patients with head and neck ACC lung metastases were retrospectively analyzed. According to the initial treatment of patients, they are divided into 4 groups: surgery, surgery+chemotherapy or radiotherapy, chemotherapy or radiotherapy and supportive treatment. The patients were staged according to the International Registry of Lung Metastases Staging System (IRLM). Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test were used to compare the statistical differences of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with different treatment methods and different IRLM stages. RESULTS: The OS and PFS of patients undergoing surgery are better than those of supportive therapy or radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy (OS: P<0.000,1; PFS: P<0.000,1). The OS and PFS of patients with low stage IRLM are better than those with high stage (OS: P<0.000,1; PFS: P<0.000,1). Patients with single lung metastasis and without pleural effusion have better OS and PFS. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term prognosis of patients with lung metastasis of head and neck ACC who undergo surgery is better than other treatments, which is related to higher OS and PFS. For patients with ACC lung metastases who are operationally eligible, the significance of complete surgical resection should be higher than other treatment options.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adenoid cystic carcinoma; Head and neck neoplasms; Lung metastasis
Demographic characteristics and clinical data of four groups of patients
Characteristics
Surgery alone (n=29)
Surgery+CRT (n=32)
CRT (n=10)
Adjuvant therapy (n=5)
P
Categoric data are expressed as number (%) and continuous data as Mean±SD or median (interquartile range). BMI: body mass index; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in one second; ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists; IRLM: International Registry of Lung Metastases Staging System.
Age (yr)
43.83±17.23
48.03±15.88
50.40±0.83
58.20±6.72
0.233
Gender
0.217
Male
9 (31.03%)
17 (53.12%)
6 (60.00%)
3 (60.00%)
Female
20 (68.97%)
15 (46.88%)
4 (40.00%)
2 (40.00%)
BMI (kg/m2)
22.99±3.26
23.35±2.61
24.97±4.01
22.88±2.35
0.356
FEV1 (%)
87.83±6.25
87.90±6.51
82.17±8.31
86.58±7.98
0.115
Smoke
0.518
Never
25 (86.21%)
23 (71.88%)
9 (90.00%)
4 (80.00%)
Current smokers
1 (3.45%)
5 (15.62%)
0 (0.00%)
1 (20.00%)
Abstained for at least 1 year
3 (10.34%)
4 (12.50%)
1 (10.00%)
0 (0.00%)
ASA grade
-
1
20 (68.97%)
23 (71.88%)
-
-
2
7 (24.14%)
8 (25.00%)
-
-
3
2 (6.90%)
1 (3.12%)
-
-
Radiotherapy
< 0.001
No
29 (100.00%)
17 (53.12%)
4 (40.00%)
5 (100.00%)
Yes
0 (0.00%)
15 (46.88%)
6 (60.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Chemotherapy regimens
< 0.001
No
29 (100.00%)
7 (21.88%)
5 (50.00%)
5 (100.00%)
Yes
0 (0.00%)
25(78.12%)
5 (50.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Metastases largest diameter (cm)
0.435
< 2.5
20 (68.97%)
22 (68.75%)
8 (80.00%)
3 (60.00%)
2.5-5.0
8 (27.59%)
6 (18.75%)
0 (0.00%)
1 (20.00%)
> 5.0
1 (3.45%)
4 (12.50%)
2 (20.00%)
1 (20.00%)
Number of metastatic tumors
0.395
Single
17 (58.62%)
19 (59.38%)
5 (50.00%)
1 (20.00%)
Multiple
12 (41.38%)
13 (40.62%)
5 (50.00%)
4 (80.00%)
Surgical procedures
< 0.001
None
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
10 (100.00%)
5 (100.00%)
Wedge resection
12 (41.38%)
12 (37.50%)
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Lobectomy
8 (27.59%)
9 (28.12%)
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Segmentectomy
6 (20.69%)
10 (31.25%)
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Sleeve lobectomy
3 (10.34%)
1 (3.12%)
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
IRLM
< 0.001
Ⅰ
10 (34.48%)
14 (43.75%)
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Ⅱ
15 (51.72%)
11 (34.38%)
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Ⅲ
4 (13.79%)
7 (21.88%)
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Ⅳ
0 (0.00%)
0 (0.00%)
10 (100.00%)
5 (100.00%)
Combined with pleural effusion
< 0.001
None
26 (89.66%)
29 (90.62%)
8 (80.00%)
0 (0.00%)
Unilateral pleural effusion
2 (6.90%)
2 (6.25%)
0 (0.00%)
4 (80.00%)
Bilateral pleural effusion
1 (3.45%)
1 (3.12%)
2 (20.00%)
1 (20.00%)
四组患者人口学特征及临床资料Demographic characteristics and clinical data of four groups of patients
Comparison of OS (A) and PFS (B) survival curves of patients with ACC lung metastases in different treatment groups. According to the IRLM, the OS (C) and PFS (D) of stage Ⅰ+Ⅱ patients are significantly better than those of stage Ⅲ+Ⅳ patients. PFS: progression-free survival.
Comparison of survival curves of patients with ACC lung metastases with different treatments. There was no significant difference in OS (A) and PFS (B) between the surgery alone group and the surgery+CRT group; The OS (C) and PFS (D) of the patients in the surgery group were significantly better than those in the CRT or adjuvant therapy groups.
不同治疗组ACC肺转移患者OS(A)及PFS(B)生存曲线比较。按照IRLM分期系统,低分期(Ⅰ期+Ⅱ期)患者的OS(C)和PFS(D)明显优于高分期(Ⅲ期+Ⅳ期)患者。Comparison of OS (A) and PFS (B) survival curves of patients with ACC lung metastases in different treatment groups. According to the IRLM, the OS (C) and PFS (D) of stage Ⅰ+Ⅱ patients are significantly better than those of stage Ⅲ+Ⅳ patients. PFS: progression-free survival.不同治疗方式ACC肺转移患者生存曲线比较。单纯手术组患者与手术切除联合放疗或化疗组患者的OS(A)及PFS(B)未见明显统计学差异;接受手术治疗的患者OS(C)及PFS(D)明显优于接受放化疗及辅助支持治疗的患者。Comparison of survival curves of patients with ACC lung metastases with different treatments. There was no significant difference in OS (A) and PFS (B) between the surgery alone group and the surgery+CRT group; The OS (C) and PFS (D) of the patients in the surgery group were significantly better than those in the CRT or adjuvant therapy groups.
Comparison of survival curves of patients with different lung metastasis diameter and number subgroups. There was no significant difference in OS (A) and PFS (B) in the three subgroups of patients with lung metastases with a maximum diameter of < 2.5 cm, 2.5 cm-5.0 cm, and > 5.0 cm. The OS (C) and PFS (D) of patients with single lung metastases were significantly better than those with multiple lung metastases, and the difference was statistically significant.
Survival curve of ACC patients with pleural metastasis and pleural effusion. The OS (A) and PFS (B) of patients without pleural effusion were significantly better than those with pleural effusion.
不同肺转移瘤直径及数目亚组患者生存曲线比较。肺转移瘤最大直径 < 2.5 cm、2.5 cm-5.0 cm、 > 5.0 cm三个亚组患者OS(A)和PFS(B)差异无明显统计学意义。单发肺转移瘤患者的OS(C)及PFS(D)明显优于多发肺转移瘤患者,差异具有统计学意义。Comparison of survival curves of patients with different lung metastasis diameter and number subgroups. There was no significant difference in OS (A) and PFS (B) in the three subgroups of patients with lung metastases with a maximum diameter of < 2.5 cm, 2.5 cm-5.0 cm, and > 5.0 cm. The OS (C) and PFS (D) of patients with single lung metastases were significantly better than those with multiple lung metastases, and the difference was statistically significant.合并胸膜转移胸腔积液ACC患者的生存曲线。无胸膜转移胸腔积液的患者的OS(A)及PFS(B)明显优于合并胸膜转移胸腔积液的患者。Survival curve of ACC patients with pleural metastasis and pleural effusion. The OS (A) and PFS (B) of patients without pleural effusion were significantly better than those with pleural effusion.
Authors: Benjamin A Högerle; Felix Lasitschka; Thomas Muley; Nina Bougatf; Klaus Herfarth; Sebastian Adeberg; Martin Eichhorn; Jürgen Debus; Hauke Winter; Stefan Rieken; Matthias Uhl Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-07-04 Impact factor: 4.309