Search

Objective: To evaluate the completeness and reliability of recurrence data from an institutional cancer registry for patients with head and neck cancer. Patients and Methods: Recurrence information was collected by radiation oncology and otolaryngology researchers. This was compared with the institutional cancer registry for continuous patients treated with radiation therapy for head and neck cancer at a tertiary cancer center. The sensitivity and specificity of institutional cancer registry data was calculated using manual review as the gold standard. False negative recurrences were compared to true positive recurrences to assess for differences in patient characteristics. Results: A total of 1338 patients who were treated from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2017, were included in a cancer registry and underwent review. Of them, 375 (30%) had confirmed cancer recurrences, 45 (3%) had concern for recurrence without radiologic or pathologic confirmation, and 31 (2%) had persistent disease. Most confirmed recurrences were distant (37%) or distant plus locoregional (29%), whereas few were local (11%), regional (9%), or locoregional (14%) alone. The cancer registry accuracy was 89.4%, sensitivity 61%, and specificity 99%. Time to recurrence was associated with registry accuracy. True positives had recurrences at a median of 414 days vs 1007 days for false negatives. Conclusion: Currently, institutional cancer registry recurrence data lacks the required accuracy for implementation into studies without manual confirmation. Longer follow-up of cancer status will likely improve sensitivity. No identified differences in patients accounted for differences in sensitivity. New, ideally automated, data abstraction tools are needed to improve detection of cancer recurrences and minimize manual chart review.

Purpose: To assess any correlation between swallowing dysfunction and radiation dose to 5 subregions of the larynx. Methods and Materials: A cohort of 136 patients with head and neck cancer, treated with either photon or proton radiation therapy, was assessed using an endpoint of patient-reported swallowing scores, evaluated with the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-H&N35 survey, within 1 month after treatment. Five subregions of the larynx were contoured, and dosimetric metrics were extracted for each subregion as well as the total larynx. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression statistical analyses were used to determine statistical correlation with the dose metrics and clinical variables. Univariate regression models were statistically compared using a non-nested model test. Results: Under univariate analysis, unilateral versus bilateral nodal irradiation (P = .004), concurrent chemotherapy (P = .007), and surgery (P = .015) were statistically significant predictors of poor swallowing score. Unilateral versus bilateral irradiation was statistically significant under multivariate analysis (P = .039). The epiglottis was the most predictive subregion of swallowing score, with a majority (21 of 25) of dosimetric variables being identified as statistically significant. The maximum dose to the epiglottis was the most significant dosimetric variable tested for poor swallowing score in both univariate (P = .003) and multivariate (P = .051) analyses. Comparison of univariate models indicated a general preference for epiglottic variables with the mean dose to the epiglottis being preferred at a statistically significant level in many cases. Conclusions: These results show the relatively increased sensitivity of the epiglottis compared with the rest of the larynx when considering patient-reported decrements in quality-of-life swallowing score and support both the inclusion of the epiglottis in standard larynx contours and the assessment of the epiglottis dose during plan evaluation. Our data suggest that keeping the mean and max doses to the epiglottis

Purpose: Radiation therapy (RT) is the standard treatment for patients with inoperable skin malignancies of the head and neck region (H&N), and as adjuvant treatment post surgery in patients at high risk for local or regional recurrence. This study reports clinical outcomes of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for these malignancies. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed cases involving 47 patients with H&N malignancies of the skin (squamous cell, basal cell, melanoma, Merkel cell, angiosarcoma, other) who underwent IMPT for curative intent between July 2016 and July 2019. Overall survival was estimated via Kaplan-Meier analysis, and oncologic outcomes were reported as cumulative incidence with death as a competing risk. Results: The 2-year estimated local recurrence rate, regional recurrence rate, local regional recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate, and overall survival were 11.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1%–30.3%), 4.4% (95% CI, 1.1%–17.4%), 15.5% (95% CI, 7%-34.3%), 23.4% (95% CI, 5.8%–95.5%), and 87.2% (95% CI, 75.7%–100%), respectively. No patient was reported to have a grade 3 or higher adverse event during the last week of treatment or at the 3-month follow-up visit. Conclusion: IMPT is safe and effective in the treatment of skin malignancies of the H&N.

Purpose: Human papillomavirus–associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV[+]OPSCC) requires further study to optimize the existing clinical staging system and guide treatment selection. We hypothesize that incorporation of the number of radiographically positive lymph nodes will further stratify patients with clinical N1 (cN1) HPV(+)OPSCC. Methods and Materials: A post hoc analysis from 2 prospective clinical trials at a high-volume referral center was conducted. Patients underwent primary tumor resection and lymphadenectomy, followed by either standard-of-care radiation therapy (60 Gy in 30 fractions) with or without cisplatin (40 mg/m2 weekly) or de-escalated radiation therapy (30 Gy in 20 twice-daily fractions) with concomitant 15 mg/m2 docetaxel once weekly. Imaging studies were independently reviewed by a blinded neuroradiologist classifying radiographic extranodal extension (rENE) and the number and maximal size of involved lymph nodes. Patients without pathologic data available for assessment were excluded. Results: A total of 260 patients were included. Of these, 216 (83%) were cN1. Patients had a median of 2 radiographically positive lymph nodes (range, 0-12), and 107 (41%) had rENE. For cN1 patients, stratifying by radiographically positive lymph nodes (1-2 vs 3-4 vs >4) was predictive of progression-free survival (PFS) (P = .017), with 2-year PFS rates of 96%, 88%, and 81%, respectively. More than 2 radiographically positive lymph nodes was identified as a significant threshold for PFS (P = .0055) and overall survival (P = .029). Radiographic ENE and lymph node size were not predictive of PFS among cN1 patients. Conclusions: The number of radiographically positive lymph nodes is predictive of PFS and overall survival and could be used to meaningfully subcategorize cN1 patients with HPV(+)OPSCC. We recommend further validation of our proposal that cN1 patients with 1 to 2 radiologically positive lymph nodes be categorized as cN1a, patients with 3 to 4 radiologically positive lymph nodes categorized as cN1b, and patients with >4 radiographically positive lymph nodes categorized as cN1c.

Purpose: To understand how verification computed tomography-quality assurance (CTQA) scans influenced clinical decision-making to replan patients with head and neck cancer and identify predictors for replanning to guide intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) clinical practice. Patients and Methods: We performed a quality-improvement study by prospectively collecting data on 160 consecutive patients with head and neck cancer treated using spot-scanning IMPT who underwent weekly verification CT-QA scans. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to determine the cumulative probability of a replan by week. Predictors for replanning were determined with univariate (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) Cox model hazard ratios (HRs). Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratios (ORs). P < .05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of the 160 patients, 79 (49.4%) had verification CT-QA scans, which prompted a replan. The cumulative probability of a replan by week 1 was 13.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.82-18.9), week 2, 25.0% (95% CI, 18.0-31.4), week 3, 33.1% (95% CI, 25.4-40.0), week 4, 45.6% (95% CI, 37.3-52.8), and week 5 and 6, 49.4% (95% CI, 41.0- 56.6). Predictors for replanning were sinonasal disease site (UVA: HR, 1.82, P = .04; MVA: HR, 3.64, P = .03), advanced stage disease (UVA: HR, 4.68, P < .01; MVA: HR, 3.10, P < .05), dose . 60 Gy equivalent (GyE; relative biologic effectiveness, 1.1) (UVA: HR, 1.99, P < .01; MVA: HR, 2.20, P < .01), primary disease (UVA: HR, 2.00 versus recurrent, P = .01; MVA: HR, 2.46, P = .01), concurrent chemotherapy (UVA: HR, 2.05, P < .01; MVA: not statistically significant [NS]), definitive intent treatment (UVA: HR, 1.70 versus adjuvant, P < .02; MVA: NS), bilateral neck treatment (UVA: HR, 2.07, P = .03; MVA: NS), and greater number of beams (5 beam UVA: HR, 5.55 versus 1 or 2 beams, P < .02; MVA: NS). Maximal weight change from baseline was associated with higher odds of a replan (_3 kg: OR, 1.97, P = .04; _ 5 kg: OR, 2.13, P = .02). Conclusions: Weekly verification CT-QA scans frequently influenced clinical decisionmaking to replan. Additional studies that evaluate the practice of monitoring IMPTtreated patients with weekly CT-QA scans and whether that improves clinical outcomes are warranted.