Search

Radiation therapy (RT) consensus contouring guidelines in the postoperative setting for complex cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck have been developed by expert clinicians in the field of head and neck and dermato-oncology and members of the Head and Neck Cancer International Group to assist radiation oncologists involved in the management of this disease. These guidelines present a set of principles used to define postoperative RT volumes and corresponding minimum doses after resection of all macroscopic tumor with or without microscopic residual disease. It is anticipated they will promote the harmonization of postoperative RT globally and contribute to a reduction in treatment variation among clinicians, allowing for RT quality and outcomes assessment across institutions.

Radiation therapy (RT) consensus contouring guidelines in the postoperative setting for complex cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck have been developed by expert clinicians in the field of head and neck and dermato-oncology and members of the Head and Neck Cancer International Group to assist radiation oncologists involved in the management of this disease. These guidelines present a set of principles used to define postoperative RT volumes and corresponding minimum doses after resection of all macroscopic tumor with or without microscopic residual disease. It is anticipated they will promote the harmonization of postoperative RT globally and contribute to a reduction in treatment variation among clinicians, allowing for RT quality and outcomes assessment across institutions.

Radiation therapy (RT) consensus contouring guidelines in the postoperative setting for complex cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck have been developed by expert clinicians in the field of head and neck and dermato-oncology and members of the Head and Neck Cancer International Group to assist radiation oncologists involved in the management of this disease. These guidelines present a set of principles used to define postoperative RT volumes and corresponding minimum doses after resection of all macroscopic tumor with or without microscopic residual disease. It is anticipated they will promote the harmonization of postoperative RT globally and contribute to a reduction in treatment variation among clinicians, allowing for RT quality and outcomes assessment across institutions.

This study explored associative relationships between radiotherapy dose volumes delivered to the dysphagia aspiration risk structures (DARS) and swallowing physiological disturbance at 3 months post treatment in a homogenous cohort of patients who received (chemo)radiotherapy ((C)RT) for oropharyngeal head and neck cancer (HNC). Participants(n = 53) were a subgroup of patients previously recruited as part of a prospective randomised trial, and had undergone physiological swallowing assessment using videofluroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) at 3 months post (C)RT. The extended oral cavity (EOC), supraglottic larynx (SGL), glottic larynx (GL), cricopharyngeal inlet (CI), and pharyngeal constrictor muscles (PCM) were contoured as per international consensus guidelines and dose volume histograms (DVHs) were generated for each structure. Each DVH was analysed to reveal mean, maximum and partial radiotherapy doses of V40, V50 and V60 for each structure. Physiological swallowing function on VFSS was rated using the Modified Barium Swallow Impairment Profile (MBSImP). A binary logistic regression model was used to establish associative relationships between radiotherapy dose to the DARS and physiological changes within the swallowing mechanism. Structures that received the largest volumes of radiotherapy dose were the PCM and SGL. Significant relationships were found between the proportion of the EOC, SGL, GL and PCMs that received radiotherapy doses > 40 Gy, > 50 Gy and > 60 Gy and the likelihood of a moderate-severe physiological swallowing impairment (on the MBSImP). Whilst the current study was exploratory in nature, these preliminary findings provide novel evidence to suggest structure-specific associative relationships between radiotherapy dose and impacts to corresponding swallow physiology in patients with oropharyngeal HNC.

The speed and scale of the global COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented pressures on health services worldwide, requiring new methods of service delivery during the health crisis. In the setting of severe resource constraint and high risk of infection to patients and clinicians, there is an urgent need to identify consensus statements on head and neck surgical oncology practice. We completed a modified Delphi consensus process of three rounds with 40 international experts in head and neck cancer surgical, radiation, and medical oncology, representing 35 international professional societies and national clinical trial groups. Endorsed by 39 societies and professional bodies, these consensus practice recommendations aim to decrease inconsistency of practice, reduce uncertainty in care, and provide reassurance for clinicians worldwide for head and neck surgical oncology in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the setting of acute severe resource constraint and high risk of infection to patients and staff.

PurposeBecause of the unprecedented disruption of health care services caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) identified an urgent need to issue practice recommendations for radiation oncologists treating head and neck cancer (HNC) in a time of limited resources and heightened risk for patients and staff.Methods and materialsA panel of international experts from ASTRO, ESTRO, and select Asia-Pacific countries completed a modified rapid Delphi process. Topics and questions were presented to the group, and subsequent questions were developed from iterative feedback. Each survey was open online for 24 hours, and successive rounds started within 24 hours of the previous round. The chosen cutoffs for strong agreement (≥80%) and agreement (≥66%) were extrapolated from the RAND methodology. Two pandemic scenarios, early (risk mitigation) and late (severely reduced radiation therapy resources), were evaluated. The panel developed treatment recommendations for 5 HNC cases.ResultsIn total, 29 of 31 of those invited (94%) accepted, and after a replacement 30 of 30 completed all 3 surveys (100% response rate). There was agreement or strong agreement across a number of practice areas, including treatment prioritization, whether to delay initiation or interrupt radiation therapy for intercurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection, approaches to treatment (radiation dose-fractionation schedules and use of chemotherapy in each pandemic scenario), management of surgical cases in event of operating room closures, and recommended adjustments to outpatient clinic appointments and supportive care.ConclusionsThis urgent practice recommendation was issued in the knowledge of the very difficult circumstances in which our patients find themselves at present, navigating strained health care systems functioning with limited resources and at heightened risk to their health during the COVID-19 pandemic

PurposeBecause of the unprecedented disruption of health care services caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) identified an urgent need to issue practice recommendations for radiation oncologists treating head and neck cancer (HNC) in a time of limited resources and heightened risk for patients and staff.Methods and materialsA panel of international experts from ASTRO, ESTRO, and select Asia-Pacific countries completed a modified rapid Delphi process. Topics and questions were presented to the group, and subsequent questions were developed from iterative feedback. Each survey was open online for 24 hours, and successive rounds started within 24 hours of the previous round. The chosen cutoffs for strong agreement (≥80%) and agreement (≥66%) were extrapolated from the RAND methodology. Two pandemic scenarios, early (risk mitigation) and late (severely reduced radiation therapy resources), were evaluated. The panel developed treatment recommendations for 5 HNC cases.ResultsIn total, 29 of 31 of those invited (94%) accepted, and after a replacement 30 of 30 completed all 3 surveys (100% response rate). There was agreement or strong agreement across a number of practice areas, including treatment prioritization, whether to delay initiation or interrupt radiation therapy for intercurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection, approaches to treatment (radiation dose-fractionation schedules and use of chemotherapy in each pandemic scenario), management of surgical cases in event of operating room closures, and recommended adjustments to outpatient clinic appointments and supportive care.ConclusionsThis urgent practice recommendation was issued in the knowledge of the very difficult circumstances in which our patients find themselves at present, navigating strained health care systems functioning with limited resources and at heightened risk to their health during the COVID-19 pandemic

PurposeBecause of the unprecedented disruption of health care services caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) identified an urgent need to issue practice recommendations for radiation oncologists treating head and neck cancer (HNC) in a time of limited resources and heightened risk for patients and staff.Methods and materialsA panel of international experts from ASTRO, ESTRO, and select Asia-Pacific countries completed a modified rapid Delphi process. Topics and questions were presented to the group, and subsequent questions were developed from iterative feedback. Each survey was open online for 24 hours, and successive rounds started within 24 hours of the previous round. The chosen cutoffs for strong agreement (≥80%) and agreement (≥66%) were extrapolated from the RAND methodology. Two pandemic scenarios, early (risk mitigation) and late (severely reduced radiation therapy resources), were evaluated. The panel developed treatment recommendations for 5 HNC cases.ResultsIn total, 29 of 31 of those invited (94%) accepted, and after a replacement 30 of 30 completed all 3 surveys (100% response rate). There was agreement or strong agreement across a number of practice areas, including treatment prioritization, whether to delay initiation or interrupt radiation therapy for intercurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection, approaches to treatment (radiation dose-fractionation schedules and use of chemotherapy in each pandemic scenario), management of surgical cases in event of operating room closures, and recommended adjustments to outpatient clinic appointments and supportive care.ConclusionsThis urgent practice recommendation was issued in the knowledge of the very difficult circumstances in which our patients find themselves at present, navigating strained health care systems functioning with limited resources and at heightened risk to their health during the COVID-19 pandemic

The speed and scale of the global COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented pressures on health services worldwide, requiring new methods of service delivery during the health crisis. In the setting of severe resource constraint and high risk of infection to patients and clinicians, there is an urgent need to identify consensus statements on head and neck surgical oncology practice. We completed a modified Delphi consensus process of three rounds with 40 international experts in head and neck cancer surgical, radiation, and medical oncology, representing 35 international professional societies and national clinical trial groups. Endorsed by 39 societies and professional bodies, these consensus practice recommendations aim to decrease inconsistency of practice, reduce uncertainty in care, and provide reassurance for clinicians worldwide for head and neck surgical oncology in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the setting of acute severe resource constraint and high risk of infection to patients and staff.

PurposeBecause of the unprecedented disruption of health care services caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) identified an urgent need to issue practice recommendations for radiation oncologists treating head and neck cancer (HNC) in a time of limited resources and heightened risk for patients and staff.Methods and materialsA panel of international experts from ASTRO, ESTRO, and select Asia-Pacific countries completed a modified rapid Delphi process. Topics and questions were presented to the group, and subsequent questions were developed from iterative feedback. Each survey was open online for 24 hours, and successive rounds started within 24 hours of the previous round. The chosen cutoffs for strong agreement (≥80%) and agreement (≥66%) were extrapolated from the RAND methodology. Two pandemic scenarios, early (risk mitigation) and late (severely reduced radiation therapy resources), were evaluated. The panel developed treatment recommendations for 5 HNC cases.ResultsIn total, 29 of 31 of those invited (94%) accepted, and after a replacement 30 of 30 completed all 3 surveys (100% response rate). There was agreement or strong agreement across a number of practice areas, including treatment prioritization, whether to delay initiation or interrupt radiation therapy for intercurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection, approaches to treatment (radiation dose-fractionation schedules and use of chemotherapy in each pandemic scenario), management of surgical cases in event of operating room closures, and recommended adjustments to outpatient clinic appointments and supportive care.ConclusionsThis urgent practice recommendation was issued in the knowledge of the very difficult circumstances in which our patients find themselves at present, navigating strained health care systems functioning with limited resources and at heightened risk to their health during the COVID-19 pandemic

Research advocates for the use of intensive, prophylactic swallowing therapy to help reduce the severity of dysphagia in patients receiving (chemo)radiotherapy ([C]RT) for head/neck cancer (HNC). Unfortunately, the intensity of this therapy, coupled with growing patient numbers and limited clinical resources, provides challenges to many international cancer facilities. Telepractice has been proposed as a potential method to provide patients with greater support in home-practice, whilst minimising burden to the health service. This study investigated the clinical and patient-attributable costs of delivering an intensive, prophylactic swallowing therapy protocol via a new telepractice application “SwallowIT” as compared to clinician-directed FTF therapy and independent patient self-directed therapy. Patients (n = 79) with oropharyngeal HNC receiving definitive (C)RT were randomised to receive therapy via a: clinician-directed (n = 26), patient-directed (n = 27), or SwallowIT-assisted (n = 26) model of care. Data pertaining to health service costs (service time, consumables, therapy resources), patient-attributable costs (travel and wages) and patient-reported health-related quality of life (QoL) (AQoL-6D) were collected. SwallowIT provided a cost-efficient model of care when compared to the clinician-directed model, with significant cost savings to both the health service and to HNC consumers (total saving of $1901.10 AUD per patient; p < 0.001). The SwallowIT model also proved more cost-effective than the patient-directed model, yielding clinically significantly superior QoL at the end of (C)RT, for comparable costs. Overall, when compared to the alternate methods of service-delivery, SwallowIT provided a financially viable and cost-effective method for the delivery of intensive, prophylactic swallowing therapy to patients with HNC during (C)RT.

PURPOSE: Few studies have reported large inter-observer variations in target volume selection and delineation in patients treated with radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Consensus guidelines have been published for the neck nodes (see Grégoire et al., 2003, 2014), but such recommendations are lacking for primary tumour delineation. For the latter, two main schools of thoughts are prevailing, one based on geometric expansion of the Gross Tumour Volume (GTV) as promoted by DAHANCA, and the other one based on anatomical expansion of the GTV using compartmentalization of head and neck anatomy. METHOD: For each anatomic location within the larynx, hypopharynx, oropharynx and oral cavity, and for each T-stage, the DAHANCA proposal has been comprehensively reviewed and edited to include anatomic knowledge into the geometric Clinical Target Volume (CTV) delineation concept. A first proposal was put forward by the leading authors of this publication (VG and CG) and discussed with opinion leaders in head and neck radiation oncology from Europe, Asia, Australia/New Zealand, North America and South America to reach a worldwide consensus. RESULTS: This consensus proposes two CTVs for the primary tumour, the so called CTV-P1 and CVT-P2, corresponding to a high and lower tumour burden, and which should be associated with a high and a lower dose prescription, respectively. CONCLUSION: Implementation of these guidelines in the daily practice of radiation oncology should contribute to reduce treatment variations from clinicians to clinicians, facilitate the conduct of multi-institutional clinical trials, and contribute to improved care of patients with head and neck carcinoma.

To the Editor: We were pleased to read the thoughtful editorial by Drs Beadle and Anderson entitled “CTV Guidance for Head and Neck Cancers” (1) and wanted to call attention to the availability of these guidelines for download by the worldwide oncology community at the Head and Neck Cancer Intergroup (HNCIG) website. [...]

Understanding end-user populations is required in designing telepractice applications. This study explored computer literacy and health locus of control in head/neck cancer (HNC) patients to inform suitability for telerehabilitation. Sixty individuals with oropharygneal cancer were recruited. Computer literacy was examined using a 10-question survey. The Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale Form C (MHLC-C) examined perceptions of health “control”. Participants were mostly middle-aged males, from high socioeconomic backgrounds. Only 10% were non-computer users. Of the computers users, 91% reported daily use, 66% used multiple devices and over 75% rated themselves as “confident” users. More than half were open to using technology for health-related activities. High internal scores (MHLC-C) signified a belief that own behaviour influenced health status. HNC patients have high computer literacy and an internal health locus of control, both are positive factors to support telepractice models of care. This may include asynchronous models requiring heightened capacity for self-management.

PURPOSE Head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors may experience functional changes to their voice, speech and hearing following curative chemoradiotherapy. However, few studies have explored the impact of living with such changes from the perspective of the HNC survivor and their carer. The current study employed a person-centred approach to explore the lived experience of communication changes following chemoradiotherapy treatment for HNC from the perspective of survivors and carers. METHOD Participants included 14 survivors with non-glottic HNC and nine carers. All participants took part in in-depth interviews where they were encouraged to describe their experiences of living with and adjusting to communication changes following treatment. Interviews were analysed as a single data set. RESULT Four themes emerged including: (1) impairments in communication sub-systems; (2) the challenges of communicating in everyday life; (3) broad ranging effects of communication changes; and (4) adaptations as a result of communication changes. CONCLUSION These data confirm that communication changes following chemoradiotherapy have potentially negative psychosocial impacts on both the HNC survivor and their carer. Clinicians should consider the impact of communication changes on the life of the HNC survivor and their carer and provide adequate and timely education and management to address the needs of this population.

Background and purpose - Adaptive radiotherapy (ART) can account for the dosimetric impact of anatomical change in head and neck cancer patients; however it can be resource intensive. Consequently, it is imperative that patients likely to require ART are identified. The purpose of this study was to find predictive factors that identify oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPC) and nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients more likely to need ART. Materials and methods - One hundred and ten patients with OPC or NPC were analysed. Patient demographics and tumour characteristics were compared between patients who were replanned and those that were not. Factors found to be significant were included in logistic regression models. Risk profiles were developed from these models. A dosimetric analysis was performed. Results - Nodal disease stage, pre-treatment largest involved node size, diagnosis and initial weight (categorised in 2 groups) were identified as significant for inclusion in the model. Two models were found to be significant (p = 0.001), correctly classifying 98.2% and 96.1% of patients respectively. Three ART risk profiles were developed. Conclusion - Predictive factors identifying OPC or NPC patients more likely to require ART were reported. A risk profile approach could facilitate the effective implementation of ART into radiotherapy departments through forward planning and appropriate resource allocation.

Introduction Patients with virally mediated head and neck cancer (VMHNC) often present with advanced nodal disease that is highly radioresponsive as demonstrated by tumour and nodal regression during treatment. The resultant changes may impact on the planned dose distribution and so adversely affect the therapeutic ratio. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric effect of treatment-induced anatomical changes in VMHNC patients who had undergone a re-plan. Methods Thirteen patients with virally mediated oropharyngeal or nasopharyngeal cancer who presented for definitive radiotherapy between 2005 and 2010 and who had a re-plan generated were investigated. The dosimetric effect of anatomical changes, was quantified by comparing dose volume histograms (DVH) of primary and nodal gross target volumes and organs at risk (OAR), including spinal cord and parotid glands, from the original plan and a comparison plan. Results Eleven 3DCRT and 2 IMRT plans were evaluated. Dose to the spinal cord and brainstem increased by 4.1% and 2.6%, respectively. Mean dose to the parotid glands also increased by 3.5%. In contrast, the dose received by 98% of the primary and nodal gross tumour volumes decreased by 0.15% and 0.3%, respectively when comparing the initial treatment plan to the comparison plan. Conclusion In this study, treatment-induced anatomical changes had the greatest impact on OAR dose with negligible effect on the dose to nodal gross tumour volumes. In the era of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), accounting for treatment-induced anatomical changes is important as focus is placed on minimising the acute and long-term side effects of treatment.

Purpose Virally mediated head and neck cancers (VMHNC) often present with nodal involvement and are highly radioresponsive, meaning that treatment plan adaptation during radiotherapy (RT) in a subset of patients is required. We sought to determine potential risk profiles and a corresponding adaptive treatment strategy for these patients. Methodology 121 patients with virally mediated, node positive nasopharyngeal (Epstein Barr Virus positive) or oropharyngeal (Human Papillomavirus positive) cancers, receiving curative intent RT were reviewed. The type, frequency and timing of adaptive interventions, including source-to-skin distance (SSD) corrections, re-scanning and re-planning, were evaluated. Patients were reviewed based on the maximum size of the dominant node to assess the need for plan adaptation. Results Forty-six patients (38%) required plan adaptation during treatment. The median fraction at which the adaptive intervention occurred was 26 for SSD corrections and 22 for re-planning CTs. A trend toward 3 risk profile groupings was discovered: 1) Low risk with minimal need (< 10%) for adaptive intervention (dominant pre-treatment nodal size of ≤ 35 mm), 2) Intermediate risk with possible need (< 20%) for adaptive intervention (dominant pre-treatment nodal size of 36 mm – 45 mm) and 3) High-risk with increased likelihood (> 50%) for adaptive intervention (dominant pre-treatment nodal size of ≥ 46 mm). Conclusion In this study, patients with VMHNC and a maximum dominant nodal size of > 46 mm were identified at a higher risk of requiring re-planning during a course of definitive RT. Findings will be tested in a future prospective adaptive RT study.

Background: This paper reviews international patterns in sinonasal cancer incidence and mortality in light of changes in exposure to known risk factors. Sinonasal tumours are relatively rare, but they have the second highest occupational attributable fraction of all types of cancer, with a well-established link for workers exposed to wood dust. Methods: Data for a variety of countries, mainly in Europe, North America and the Asia-Pacific region, were obtained from publicly accessible sources and supplemented with information requested from selected cancer registries. Rates were directly age-standardised to the World Health Organization Standard Population. Results: The average annual incidence of sinonasal cancer was typically between 5 and 10 per million in males and between 2 and 5 per million in females between 2004 and 2008. Denmark reported the highest rates, with incidence continuing to increase, in contrast to trends in other countries which either remained relatively stable, or were decreasing slightly. There were significant recent decreases in sinonasal cancer mortality rates within two-thirds of the included countries. Conclusions: Our observations are generally consistent with efforts to limit exposure to wood dust and other potentially causal substances in the workplace, as well as a reduction in the prevalence of smoking in many developed countries. Of concern is that occupational and behavioural risks related to sinonasal cancer are likely to increase among people in less developed countries into the future. However the incentive to intervene in these countries is limited by the lack of accurate and reliable cancer data.

Purpose: Virally mediated head and neck cancers (VMHNC) often present with nodal involvement, and are generally considered radioresponsive, resulting in the need for plan adaptation during radiotherapy in a subset of patients. We sought to identify a high-risk group based on pre-treatment nodal size to be evaluated in a future prospective adaptive radiotherapy trial. Methodology: Between 2005-2010, 121 patients with virally-mediated, node positive nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal cancers, receiving definitive radiotherapy were reviewed. Patients were analysed based on maximum size of the dominant node at diagnosis with a view to grouping them in varying risk categories for the need of re-planning. The frequency and timing of the re-planning scans were also evaluated. Results: Sixteen nasopharyngeal and 105 oropharyngeal tumours were reviewed. Twenty-five (21%) patients underwent a re-planning CT at a median of 22 (range, 0-29) fractions with 1 patient requiring re-planning prior to the commencement of treatment. Based on the analysis, patients were subsequently placed into 3 groups defined by pre-treatment nodal size; ≤ 35mm (Group 1), 36-45mm (Group 2), ≥ 46mm (Group 3). Applying these groups to the patient cohort, re-planning CT’s were performed in Group 1- 8/68 (11.8%), Group 2- 4/28 (14.3%), Group 3- 13/25 (52%). Conclusion: In this series, patients with VMHNC and nodal size > 46mm appear to be a high-risk group for the need of plan adaptation during a course of definitive radiotherapy. This finding will now be tested in a prospective adaptive radiotherapy study.

Introduction: Clinical investigation has revealed a subgroup of head and neck cancers that are virally mediated. The relationship between nasopharyngeal cancer and Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) has long been established and more recently, the association between oropharyngeal cancer and Human Papillomavirus (HPV) has been revealed1,2 These cancers often present with nodal involvement and generally respond well to radiation treatment, evidenced by tumour regression1. This results in the need for treatment plan adaptation or re-planning in a subset of patients. Adaptive techniques allow the target region of the radiotherapy treatment plan to be altered in accordance with treatment-induced changes to ensure that under or over dosing does not occur3. It also assists in limiting potential overdosing of surrounding critical normal tissues4. We sought to identify a high-risk group based on nodal size to be evaluated in a future prospective adaptive radiotherapy trial. Method: Between 2005-2010, 121 patients with virally mediated, node positive nasopharyngeal (EBV positive) or oropharyngeal (HPV positive) cancers, receiving curative intent radiotherapy treatment were reviewed. Patients were analysed based on maximum size of the dominant node at diagnosis with a view to grouping them in varying risk categories to determine the need of re-planning. The frequency and timing of the re-planning scans were also evaluated. Results: Sixteen nasopharyngeal and 105 oropharyngeal tumours were reviewed. Twenty-five (21%) patients underwent a re-planning CT at a median of 22 (range, 0-29) fractions with 1 patient requiring re-planning prior to the commencement of treatment. Based on the analysis, patients were subsequently placed into risk categories; ≤35mm (Group 1), 36-45mm (Group 2), ≥46mm (Group 3). Re-planning CT’s were performed in Group 1- 8/68 (11.8%), Group 2- 4/28 (14.3%), Group 3- 13/25 (52%). Conclusion: In this series, patients with virally mediated head and neck cancer and noda

Background: Recent clinical studies have demonstrated an emerging subgroup of head and neck cancers that are virally mediated. This disease appears to be a distinct clinical entity with patients presenting younger and with more advanced nodal disease, having lower tobacco and alcohol exposure and highly radiosensitive tumours. This means they are living longer, often with the debilitating functional side effects of treatment. The primary objective of this study was to determine how virally mediated nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal cancers respond to radiation therapy treatment. The aim was to determine risk categories and corresponding adaptive treatment management strategies to proactively manage these patients. Method/Results: 121 patients with virally mediated, node positive nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal cancer who received radiotherapy treatment with curative intent between 2005 and 2010 were studied. Relevant patient demographics including age, gender, diagnosis, TNM stage, pre-treatment nodal size and dose delivered was recorded. Each patient’s treatment plan was reviewed to determine if another computed tomography (re-CT) scan was performed and at what time point (dose/fraction) this occurred. The justification for this re-CT was determined using four categories: tumour and/or nodal regression, weight loss, both or other. Patients who underwent a re-CT were further investigated to determine whether a new plan was calculated. If a re-plan was performed, the dosimetric effect was quantified by comparing dose volume histograms of planning target volumes and critical structures from the actual treatment delivered and the original treatment plan. Preliminary results demonstrated that 25/121 (20.7%) patients required a re-CT and that these re-CTs were performed between fractions 20 to 25 of treatment. The justification for these re-CTs consisted of a combination of tumour and/or nodal regression and weight loss. 16/25 (13.2%) patients had a replan calculated. 9 (

Purpose: Virally mediated head and neck cancers (VMHNC) often present with nodal involvement, and are generally considered radioresponsive, resulting in the need for a re-planning CT during radiotherapy (RT) in a subset of patients. We sought to identify a high-risk group based on nodal size to be evaluated in a future prospective adaptive RT trial. Methodology: Between 2005-2010, 121 patients with virally-mediated, node positive nasopharyngeal (EBV positive) or oropharyngeal (HPV positive) cancers, receiving curative intent RT were reviewed. Patients were analysed based on maximum size of the dominant node with a view to grouping them in varying risk categories for the need of re-planning. The frequency and timing of the re-planning scans were also evaluated. Results: Sixteen nasopharyngeal and 105 oropharyngeal tumours were reviewed. Twenty-five (21%) patients underwent a re-planning CT at a median of 22 (range, 0-29) fractions with 1 patient requiring re-planning prior to the commencement of treatment. Based on the analysis, patients were subsequently placed into 3 groups; ≤35mm (Group 1), 36-45mm (Group 2), ≥46mm (Group 3). Re-planning CT’s were performed in Group 1- 8/68 (11.8%), Group 2- 4/28 (14.3%), Group 3- 13/25 (52%). Sample size did not allow statistical analysis to detect a significant difference or exclusion of a lack of difference between the 3 groups. Conclusion: In this series, patients with VMHNC and nodal size > 46mm appear to be a high-risk group for the need of re-planning during a course of definitive radiotherapy. This finding will now be tested in a prospective adaptive RT study.

Purpose: Virally mediated head and neck cancers (VMHNC) often present with nodal involvement, and are generally considered radioresponsive, resulting in the need for a re-planning CT during radiotherapy (RT) in a subset of patients. We sought to identify a high-risk group based on nodal size to be evaluated in a future prospective adaptive RT trial. Methodology: Between 2005-2010, 121 patients with virally-mediated, node positive nasopharyngeal (EBV positive) or oropharyngeal (HPV positive) cancers, receiving curative intent RT were reviewed. Patients were analysed based on maximum size of the dominant node with a view to grouping them in varying risk categories for the need of re-planning. The frequency and timing of the re-planning scans were also evaluated. Results: Sixteen nasopharyngeal and 105 oropharyngeal tumours were reviewed. Twenty-five (21%) patients underwent a re-planning CT at a median of 22 (range, 0-29) fractions with 1 patient requiring re-planning prior to the commencement of treatment. Based on the analysis, patients were subsequently placed into 3 groups; ≤35mm (Group 1), 36-45mm (Group 2), ≥46mm (Group 3). Re-planning CT’s were performed in Group 1- 8/68 (11.8%), Group 2- 4/28 (14.3%), Group 3- 13/25 (52%). Sample size did not allow statistical analysis to detect a significant difference or exclusion of a lack of difference between the 3 groups. Conclusion: In this series, patients with VMHNC and nodal size > 46mm appear to be a high-risk group for the need of re-planning during a course of definitive radiotherapy. This finding will now be tested in a prospective adaptive RT study.