Search

Simple Summary: Salivary duct carcinomas (SDC) can present with distinct immunologic profiles similar to breast cancer, such as androgen receptor (AR) and HER-2/Neu-positivity, raising the hypothesis that these tumors may respond to hormonal signaling. No consensus exists on how to best manage this entity. The data evaluating the use of targeted therapies, such as androgen deprivation therapy and HER-2 receptor inhibitors, in the front-line setting when treating curatively is limited. We studied patients with AR+ SDC, demonstrating high rates of control and survival using an aggressive approach to treatment. Immunoprofiles were highly variable, highlighting the potential for future treatment individualization. We hope that this may allow for personalization of treatment in the future, using molecular profiling to determine whether the addition of biological agents in the definitive setting against specific targets, such as AR and HER-2/Neu, will further improve outcomes for these patients. Background: Salivary duct carcinomas (SDC) are a rare and aggressive subtype of salivary gland neoplasm. They can present with distinct immunoprofiles, such as androgen receptor (AR) and HER-2/Neu-positivity. To date, no consensus exists on how to best manage this entity. Methods: All patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic AR+ SDC of the parotid from 2013 to 2019 treated with curative intent were included. Immunologic tumor profiling was conducted using 24 distinct markers. Kaplan–Meier analyses were used to estimate locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant control, and overall survival (OS). Results: Fifteen patients were included. Nine (60%) patients presented with T4 disease and eight (53%) had positive ipsilateral cervical lymphadenopathy. Ten (67%) patients underwent trimodality therapy, including surgery followed by adjuvant radiation and concurrent systemic therapy. The median follow-up was 5.5 years (interquartile range, 4.8–6.1). The estimated 5-year rates of LRR, distant progression, and OS were 6%, 13%, and 87%, respectively. Conclusion: Despite only including AR+ SDC of the parotid, immunoprofiles, such as expression of HER-2, were highly variable, highlighting the potential to tailor systemic regimens based on individual histologic profiles in the future. Studies with larger patient numbers using tumor-specific molecular profiling and tumor heterogeneity analyses are justified to better understand the biology of these tumors. Molecularly informed treatment approaches, including the potential use of AR- and HER-2/Neu-directed therapies upfront in the definitive setting, may hold future promise to further improve outcomes for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Immunotherapy represents the standard-of-care systemic therapy in patients with recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer (HNC). However, these patients often present with local disease, which can affect quality of life, and local progression can lead to significant morbidity. Local response rates from immunotherapy alone are subpar. Thus, palliative radiation is often utilized in this scenario. 'QuadShot'(QS), a hypofractionated palliative radiation regimen, can provide symptomatic relief and local control and may potentiate the effects of immunotherapy. There have been no previous studies evaluating the combination of immunotherapy with QS. We found that the combination of QS with concurrent immunotherapy was well tolerated and significantly improved local control compared to QS alone. The median survival of 9.4 months compares favorably to historical controls for patients with HNC treated with QS. This approach represents a promising treatment option for patients with HNC unsuited for curative-intent treatment and warrants prospective evaluation. Objectives: Patients with recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer (HNC) have limited treatment options. 'QuadShot' (QS), a hypofractionated palliative radiotherapy regimen, can provide symptomatic relief and local control and may potentiate the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We compared outcomes of QS ± concurrent ICIs in the palliative treatment of HNC. Materials and Methods: We identified patients who received ≥three cycles of QS from 2017 to 2022 and excluded patients without post-treatment clinical evaluation or imaging. Outcomes for patients who received QS alone were compared to those treated with ICI concurrent with QS, defined as receipt of ICI within 4 weeks of QS. Results: Seventy patients were included, of whom 57% received concurrent ICI. Median age was 65.5 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 57.9–77.8), and 50% patients had received prior radiation to a median dose of 66 Gy (IQR: 60–70). Median follow-up was 8.8 months. Local control was significantly higher with concurrent ICIs (12-month: 85% vs. 63%, p = 0.038). Distant control (12-month: 56% vs. 63%, p = 0.629) and median overall survival (9.0 vs. 10.0 months, p = 0.850) were similar between the two groups. On multivariable analysis, concurrent ICI was a significant predictor of local control (HR for local failure: 0.238; 95% CI: 0.073–0.778; p = 0.018). Overall, 23% patients experienced grade 3 toxicities, which was similar between the two groups. Conclusions: The combination of QS with concurrent ICIs was well tolerated and significantly improved local control compared to QS alone. The median OS of 9.4 months compares favorably to historical controls for patients with HNC treated with QS. This approach represents a promising treatment option for patients with HNC unsuited for curative-intent treatment and warrants prospective evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]