Search

Background Persistent controversy exists with regard to how and when patients with head and neck cancer should undergo imaging after definitive therapy. The current study was conducted to evaluate whether the type of imaging modality used in posttreatment imaging impacts cancer-specific survival for patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Methods A retrospective study of National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program-Medicare-linked data in patients with an advanced stage of the 3 most common head and neck malignancies (oral cavity, oropharynx, and larynx) was conducted. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs for cancer-specific survival were estimated for patients diagnosed with any of these cancers between 2006 and 2015. Results Significant improvement with regard to cancer-specific survival was observed among patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III and stage IVA laryngeal cancer who underwent positron emission tomography (PET) and/or computed tomography (CT) imaging during the first 6 months after receipt of definitive treatment (hazard ratio, 0.517; 95% CI, 0.33-0.811) compared with those who underwent CT. There was a trend toward an improvement in cancer-specific survival among patients with oral cavity or oropharyngeal malignancies who underwent PET/CT imaging, but it did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions Compared with CT imaging, posttreatment imaging with PET was associated with improved survival in patients with advanced laryngeal carcinoma.

Background The comparative efficacy of cisplatin (CDDP), carboplatin, and cetuximab (CTX) delivered concurrently with radiation for locally advanced oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma continues to be evaluated. Methods The linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was used to identify and compare patient and disease profiles, mortality, toxicity, and overall cost for patients with oropharynx cancer undergoing definitive concurrent chemoradiation with CDDP, carboplatin, or CTX between 2006 and 2011. The human papillomavirus status was unknown. The primary outcome was 2-year overall survival (OS). Results Four hundred nine patients receiving concurrent CDDP (n = 167), carboplatin (n = 69), or CTX (n = 173) were included. Those who were older, those who were nonwhite, and those with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 were less likely to receive CDDP. Two-year OS was inferior with CTX (hazard ratio [HR], 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-2.60; P = .020) and no different with carboplatin (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.73-2.35; P = .362) in a Cox proportional hazards model (reference CDDP). There was no statistically significant difference between carboplatin and CTX (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.77-2.14; P = .891). Rates of antiemetic use and hospital visits for nausea/emesis/diarrhea or dehydration were statistically higher with CDDP. Pneumonia rates were higher with carboplatin. In the multivariate model, the corrected mean per-patient spending was significantly higher for CTX and carboplatin than CDDP ($61,133 and $65,721 vs $48,709). Conclusions Patients who received CDDP had improved OS. CDDP was also associated with slightly lower overall costs and higher antiemetic usage and hospital visit rates, although a strong selection bias was observed because those receiving CTX and carboplatin were older and had higher comorbidity scores.

BACKGROUND For patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma, perioperative chemotherapy and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are considered standard options. In the current study, the authors used the National Cancer Data Base to compare overall survival (OS) between these regimens. METHODS Patients who underwent gastrectomy for nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma from 2004 through 2012 were divided into those treated with perioperative chemotherapy without RT versus those treated with adjuvant CRT. Survival was estimated and compared using univariate and multivariate models adjusted for patient and tumor characteristics, surgical margin status, and the number of lymph nodes examined. Subset analyses were performed for factors chosen a priori, and potential interactions between treatment and covariates were assessed. RESULTS A total of 3656 eligible patients were identified, 52% of whom underwent perioperative chemotherapy and 48% of whom received postoperative CRT. The median follow-up was 47 months, and the median age of the patients was 62 years. Analysis of the entire cohort demonstrated improved OS with adjuvant RT on both univariate (median of 51 months vs 42 months; P = .013) and multivariate (hazard ratio, 0.874; 95% confidence interval, 0.790-0.967 [P = .009]) analyses. Propensity score-matched analysis also demonstrated improved OS with adjuvant RT (median of 49 months vs 39 months; P = .033). On subset analysis, a significant interaction was observed between the survival impact of adjuvant RT and surgical margins, with a greater benefit of RT noted among patients with surgical margin-positive disease (hazard ratio with RT: 0.650 vs 0.952; P for interaction

Background The optimal imaging for the staging of oropharyngeal cancer is not well defined. Methods The linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database for 2006 through 2011 was used to compare patient characteristics and hospital region by the initial imaging modality used for patients with oropharyngeal cancer. The primary outcome was 3-year cancer-specific survival (CSS). Cox proportional hazards models were adjusted for imaging, age, sex, region, education, race, American Joint Committee on Cancer stage of disease, and treatment, which were examined using backward elimination. The authors also explored how initial imaging use varied by patient characteristics and hospital region. Results A total of 1765 patients underwent initial diagnostic imaging. Of those, approximately 11.4% (202 patients) received computed tomography (CT) alone as their initial imaging modality, 5.2% (91 patients) underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) without positron emission tomography (PET), and 83.3% (1472 patients) had initial imaging that included PET. The overall 3-year CSS rate for the entire population was 63.7%. In the adjusted survival models compared by initial imaging modality, patients who underwent a PET examination were found to have higher survival than those who underwent CT alone or MRI, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.337 [95% CI, 1.001-1.785; P = .0491]; and hazard ratio, 1.748 [95% CI, 1.2-2.545; P = .0036]). Conclusions Among patients with oropharyngeal cancer, initial staging with PET imaging was associated with improved 3-year CSS compared with initial staging with MRI or CT.

BACKGROUND Given the rarity of anal cancer and the technical aspects involved in radiation (RT) planning, the authors conducted a population-based analysis evaluating the impact of radiation oncology facility volume on overall survival (OS) in patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the anal canal. METHODS The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for patients with SCC of the anal canal who underwent RT. All patients were coded as having received their entire course of RT at the NCDB reporting facility. Facility volume was categorized into tertiles (low, intermediate, and high) and was based on the number of times a facility's unique identification code appeared. RESULTS In total, 13,550 patients were identified. Patients who received treatment at higher volume radiation oncology facilities had longer OS based on multivariate analysis (MVA) (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.90; P 45 days (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.69-0.80; P

BACKGROUND The overall survival (OS) benefit of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients older than 70 years is debated. This study examines the outcomes of elderly patients receiving CRT versus radiotherapy (RT) alone. METHODS The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients older than 70 years with nonmetastatic oropharyngeal, laryngeal, or hypopharyngeal cancer (T3-4 or N(+)). CRT was defined as chemotherapy started within 14 days of the initiation of RT. Univariate analysis, multivariate analysis (MVA), propensity score matching (PSM), and recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) were performed. RESULTS The study included 4042 patients: 2538 (63%) received CRT. The median follow-up was 19 months. The unadjusted median OS was longer with the addition of CRT (P < .001). OS was superior with CRT in the MVA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.68; P < .001) and PSM analyses (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.80; P < .001) in comparison with RT alone. According to RPA, CRT was associated with longer OS for patients 81 years or younger with low comorbidity scores and either T1-2/N2-3 disease or T3-4/N0-3 disease. The survival benefit with CRT disappeared for 2 subgroups in the 71- to 81-year age range: those with T1-2, N1, and Charlson-Deyo 0-1 (CD0-1) disease and those with T3-4, N1+, and CD1+ disease. Patients who were older than 81 years did not have increased survival with CRT. The receipt of CRT was associated with a longer duration of RT (odds ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.50-2.01; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS Patients older than 70 years should not be denied concurrent chemotherapy solely on the basis of age; additional factors, including the performance status and the tumor stage, should be taken into account. Cancer 2016;122:1533–43. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy of cisplatin (CDDP), carboplatin, and cetuximab (CTX) delivered concurrently with radiation for locally advanced oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma continues to be evaluated. METHODS: The linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare database was used to identify and compare patient and disease profiles, mortality, toxicity, and overall cost for patients with oropharynx cancer undergoing definitive concurrent chemoradiation with CDDP, carboplatin, or CTX between 2006 and 2011. The human papillomavirus status was unknown. The primary outcome was 2-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Four hundred nine patients receiving concurrent CDDP (n = 167), carboplatin (n = 69), or CTX (n = 173) were included. Those who were older, those who were nonwhite, and those with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 were less likely to receive CDDP. Two-year OS was inferior with CTX (hazard ratio [HR], 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08–2.60; P = .020) and no different with carboplatin (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.732.35; P = .362) in a Cox proportional hazards model (reference CDDP). There was no statistically significant difference between carboplatin and CTX (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.77–2.14; P = .891). Rates of antiemetic use and hospital visits for nausea/emesis/diarrhea or dehydration were statistically higher with CDDP. Pneumonia rates were higher with carboplatin. In the multivariate model, the corrected mean per-patient spending was significantly higher for CTX and carboplatin than CDDP ($61,133 and $65,721 vs $48,709). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received CDDP had improved OS. CDDP was also associated with slightly lower overall costs and higher antiemetic usage and hospital visit rates, although a strong selection bias was observed because those receiving CTX and carboplatin were older and had higher comorbidity scores.

For patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma, perioperative chemotherapy and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are considered standard options. In the current study, the authors used the National Cancer Data Base to compare overall survival (OS) between these regimens.Patients who underwent gastrectomy for nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma from 2004 through 2012 were divided into those treated with perioperative chemotherapy without RT versus those treated with adjuvant CRT. Survival was estimated and compared using univariate and multivariate models adjusted for patient and tumor characteristics, surgical margin status, and the number of lymph nodes examined. Subset analyses were performed for factors chosen a priori, and potential interactions between treatment and covariates were assessed.A total of 3656 eligible patients were identified, 52% of whom underwent perioperative chemotherapy and 48% of whom received postoperative CRT. The median follow-up was 47 months, and the median age of the patients was 62 years. Analysis of the entire cohort demonstrated improved OS with adjuvant RT on both univariate (median of 51 months vs 42 months; P = .013) and multivariate (hazard ratio, 0.874; 95% confidence interval, 0.790-0.967 [P = .009]) analyses. Propensity score-matched analysis also demonstrated improved OS with adjuvant RT (median of 49 months vs 39 months; P = .033). On subset analysis, a significant interaction was observed between the survival impact of adjuvant RT and surgical margins, with a greater benefit of RT noted among patients with surgical margin-positive disease (hazard ratio with RT: 0.650 vs 0.952; P for interaction.001).In this National Cancer Data Base analysis, the use of adjuvant RT in addition to chemotherapy was associated with a significant OS advantage for patients with resected gastric cancer. The survival advantage observed with adjuvant CRT was most pronounced among patients with positive surgical margins. Cancer 2017;123:3402-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Approximately 15% of lung cancer cases are of the small cell subtype, but this variant is highly aggressive and is often diagnosed at advanced stages. Outcomes after current treatment regimens have been poor, with 5-year survival rates as low as 25% for patients with limited-stage disease. Advances in therapy for small cell lung cancer have included the development of more effective chemotherapeutic agents and radiation techniques. For example, hyperfractionated radiotherapy given early in the course of the disease can reduce local recurrence and extend survival. Other technologic advances in radiation planning and delivery such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy, image-guided adaptive radiotherapy, and 4-dimensional computed tomography/positron emission tomography have facilitated the design of treatment volumes that closely conform to the shape of the tumor, which allows higher radiation doses to be given while minimizing radiation-induced toxicity to adjacent structures. Future improvements in outcomes will require clarifying the molecular basis for this disease.

Given the rarity of anal cancer and the technical aspects involved in radiation (RT) planning, the authors conducted a population-based analysis evaluating the impact of radiation oncology facility volume on overall survival (OS) in patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the anal canal.The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for patients with SCC of the anal canal who underwent RT. All patients were coded as having received their entire course of RT at the NCDB reporting facility. Facility volume was categorized into tertiles (low, intermediate, and high) and was based on the number of times a facility's unique identification code appeared.In total, 13,550 patients were identified. Patients who received treatment at higher volume radiation oncology facilities had longer OS based on multivariate analysis (MVA) (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.90; P .001) and propensity score matching analysis (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.91; P .001). For patients who received treatment at low-volume, intermediate-volume, and high-volume centers, the 5-year OS rate was 70%, 72.2%, and 75.4%, respectively (P .001). Compared with low/intermediate-volume radiation oncology centers, high-volume centers were more likely to treat patients with concurrent chemotherapy (odds ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07-1.51; P = .006) and less likely to have treatment delays leading to an RT duration of45 days (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.69-0.80; P .001).Treatment at higher volume radiation oncology centers appears to be associated with improved OS in patients with SCC of the anal canal. These results likely reflect the relation between physician experience and delivery of high-quality RT, which perhaps is best evident in rare tumors such as anal SCC. Cancer 2017;123:228-236. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Localized esophageal carcinomas are highly aggressive and difficult to cure, as they often persist or recur after definitive chemoradiation. Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common causes of cancer, with 482,000 new cases and 407,000 deaths estimated worldwide in 2008, making it the sixth most common cause of death from cancer.1 The prevalence of esophageal cancer, specifically adenocarcinoma, in North America continues to increase in parallel with the growth in prevalence of obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease leading to Barrett’s metaplasia.2-4 Although surgery continues to be the standard approach for most localized esophageal cancers, cure rates after surgery alone have been poor, with 3- to 5-year survival rates ranging from 6% to 35%.5-7 The current trimodality approach, combining chemotherapy, radiation therapy (RT), and surgery, has significantly improved prognosis,8 with several studies showing improved survival rates.9, 10 However, many patients cannot tolerate surgery or decline it; for such individuals, definitive chemoradiation is the standard approach. The combination of RT and chemotherapy has additive effects in terms of local control and overall survival in this select population.7, 9, 11, 12 However, the optimal dose of radiation for this purpose continues to be a topic of debate, with current recommendation is to use the same dose for preoperative RT as for definitive treatment, i.e., 50.4 Gy.13 Several studies have attempted to evaluate the potential benefit of dose-escalation for esophageal cancer. The largest such study Intergroup 0123 / Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 94-05,14 found that escalating the dose to 64.8 Gy did not improve survival or local-regional control yet may have contributed to increased morbidity. However, that study used two-dimensional conformal RT (2D-CRT) with a sequential boost for dose escalation, with larger margins for both the primary and high-dose volumes than are now considered standard practice. These large treatment fields may have resulted in excessive overall toxicity. Since that study was completed, advances in the technologies associated with tumor imaging and radiation planning and delivery have allowed improved accuracy. The use of highly conformal intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has been demonstrated by several groups to provide additional flexibility in modifying dose distributions and improving normal tissue sparing.15 Compared with 2D-CRT, IMRT results in improved conformality and dose reduced to proximal critical structures. Further, use of a simultaneous integrated radiation boost with the IMRT offers the additional advantage of simultaneously delivering a higher dose to the primary tumor (at 2.2 Gy or 2.3 Gy per fraction) while lower conventional doses are used to treat subclinical disease or electively treated regions (at 1.8 Gy or 2.0 Gy per fraction).16 Nevertheless, despite these advances the doses used to treat esophageal cancer have remained the same. The principle of radiation dose escalation has translated into improved local control and enhanced survival for patients with other solid tumors, and one would anticipate similar benefits for patients with esophageal cancer, however, such studies have not been conducted.17-19 Since the current standard is to use the same RT dose for definitive and for preoperative therapy, we hypothesized that the treatment failure after definitive chemoradiation would occur in most patients within the gross tumor volume (GTV), where the tumor burden is largest. We sought here to document the sites of failure after standard-dose definitive chemoradiation therapy for esophageal cancer in terms of three commonly used radiation treatment volumes: GTV, the larger clinical target volume (CTV), and the still larger planning target volume (PTV). We further assessed a variety of patient- and disease-related characteristics for their potential utility as risk factors for identifying patterns of failure, reasoning that such factors would be useful in personalizing therapeutic approaches.

The overall survival (OS) benefit of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients older than 70 years is debated. This study examines the outcomes of elderly patients receiving CRT versus radiotherapy (RT) alone.The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients older than 70 years with nonmetastatic oropharyngeal, laryngeal, or hypopharyngeal cancer (T3-4 or N(+)). CRT was defined as chemotherapy started within 14 days of the initiation of RT. Univariate analysis, multivariate analysis (MVA), propensity score matching (PSM), and recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) were performed.The study included 4042 patients: 2538 (63%) received CRT. The median follow-up was 19 months. The unadjusted median OS was longer with the addition of CRT (P.001). OS was superior with CRT in the MVA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.68; P.001) and PSM analyses (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.80; P.001) in comparison with RT alone. According to RPA, CRT was associated with longer OS for patients 81 years or younger with low comorbidity scores and either T1-2/N2-3 disease or T3-4/N0-3 disease. The survival benefit with CRT disappeared for 2 subgroups in the 71- to 81-year age range: those with T1-2, N1, and Charlson-Deyo 0-1 (CD0-1) disease and those with T3-4, N1+, and CD1+ disease. Patients who were older than 81 years did not have increased survival with CRT. The receipt of CRT was associated with a longer duration of RT (odds ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.50-2.01; P.001).Patients older than 70 years should not be denied concurrent chemotherapy solely on the basis of age; additional factors, including the performance status and the tumor stage, should be taken into account. Cancer 2016;122:1533-43. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

About 15% of lung cancer cases are of the small cell subtype, but this variant is highly aggressive and often diagnosed at advanced stages. Outcomes after current treatment regimens have been poor, with 5-year survival rates as low as 25% for patients with limited-stage disease. Advances in therapy for small cell lung cancer have included the development of more effective chemotherapeutic agents and radiation techniques. For example, hyperfractionated radiation therapy given early in the course of the disease can reduce local recurrence and extend survival. Other technologic advances in radiation planning and delivery such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy, image-guided adaptive radiation therapy, and four-dimensional computed tomography/positron emission tomography have facilitated the design of treatment volumes that closely conform to the shape of the tumor, which allows higher radiation doses to be given while minimizing radiation-induced toxicity to adjacent structures. Future improvements in outcomes will require clarifying the molecular basis for this disease.

The c-Met/hepatocyte growth factor receptor and its family members are known to promote cancer cell migration and invasion. Signaling within and beyond this pathway contributes to the systemic spread of metastases through induction of the epithelial-mesenchymal transition, a process also implicated in mediating resistance to current anticancer therapies, including radiation. Induction of c-Met has also been observed after irradiation, suggesting that c-Met participates in radiation-induced disease progression through the epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Therefore, c-Met inhibition is an attractive target for potentially mitigating radiation resistance. This article summarizes key findings regarding crosstalk between radiotherapy and c-Met and discusses studies performed to date in which c-Met inhibition was used as a strategy to increase cellular radiosensitivity.