Search

Author(s): MD Anderson Head and Neck Surgery Treatment Guidelines Consortium; Consortium members; Maniakas, Anastasios; Jozaghi, Yelda; Zafereo, Mark E; Sturgis, Erich M; Su, Shirley Y; Gillenwater, Ann M; Gidley, Paul W; Lewis, Carol M; Diaz, Eduardo; Goepfert, Ryan P; Kupferman, Michael E; Gross, Neil D; Hessel, Amy C; Pytynia, Kristen B; Nader, Marc-Elie; Wang, Jennifer R; Lango, Miriam N; Kiong, Kimberley L; Guo, Theresa; Zhao, Xiao; Yao, Christopher MKL; Appelbaum, Eric; Alpard, Jennifer; Garcia, Jose A; Terry, Shawn; Flynn, Jill E; Bauer, Sarah; Fournier, Danielle; Burgess, Courtlyn G; Wideman, Cayla; Johnston, Matthew; You, Chenxi; De Luna, Rolando; Joseph, Liza; Diersing, Julia; Prescott, Kaitlin; Heiberger, Katherine; Mugartegui, Lilian; Rodriguez, Jessica; Zendehdel, Sara; Sellers, Justin; Friddell, Rebekah A; Thomas, Ajay; Khanjae, Sonam J; Schwarzlose, Katherine B; Chambers, Mark S; Hofstede, Theresa M; Cardoso, Richard C; Wesson, Ruth Aponte; Won, Alex; Otun, Adegbenga O; Gombos, Dan S; Al-Zubidi, Nagham; Hutcheson, Katherine A; Gunn, G Brandon; Rosenthal, David I; Gillison, Maura L; Ferrarotto, Renata; Weber, Randal S; Hanna, Ehab Y; Myers, Jeffrey N; Lai, Stephen Y | Abstract: BackgroundCOVID-19 pandemic has strained human and material resources around the world. Practices in surgical oncology had to change in response to these resource limitations, triaging based on acuity, expected oncologic outcomes, availability of supportive resources, and safety of health care personnel.MethodsThe MD Anderson Head and Neck Surgery Treatment Guidelines Consortium devised the following to provide guidance on triaging head and neck cancer (HNC) surgeries based on multidisciplinary consensus. HNC subsites considered included aerodigestive tract mucosa, sinonasal, salivary, endocrine, cutaneous, and ocular.RecommendationsEach subsite is presented separately with disease-specific recommendations. Options for alternative treatment modalities are provided if surgical treatment needs to be deferred.ConclusionThese guidelines are intended to help clinicians caring for patients with HNC appropriately allocate resources during a health care crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We continue to advocate for individual consideration of cases in a multidisciplinary fashion based on individual patient circumstances and resource availability.

To identify a clinically meaningful cut-point for the single item dry mouth question of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Head and Neck module (MDASI-HN).Head and neck cancer survivors who had received radiation therapy (RT) completed the MDASI-HN, the University of Michigan Hospital Xerostomia Questionnaire (XQ), and the health visual analog scale (VAS) of the EuroQol Five Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D). The Bayesian information criteria (BIC) were used to test the prediction power of each tool for EQ-5D VAS. The modified Breiman recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to identify a cut point of the MDASI-HN dry mouth score (MDASI-HN-DM) with EQ-5D VAS, using a ROC-based approach; regression analysis was used to confirm the threshold effect size.Two-hundred seven respondents formed the cohort. Median follow-up from the end of RT to questionnaire completion was 88 months. The single item MDASI-HN-DM score showed a linear relationship with the XQ composite score (ρ = 0.80, p 0.001). The MDASI-HN-DM displayed improved model performance for association with EQ-5D VAS as compared to XQ (BIC of 1803.7 vs. 2016.9, respectively). RPA showed that an MDASI-HN-DM score of ≥6 correlated with EQ-5D VAS decline (LogWorth 5.5).The single item MDASI-HN-DM correlated with the multi-item XQ and performed favorably in the prediction of QOL. A MDASI-HN-DM cut point of ≥6 correlated with decline in QOL.

BACKGROUND Two patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of swallowing and their correlation to quality of life (QOL) were compared in long-term survivors of oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). METHODS Scores on the single dysphagia item from the 28-item, multisymptom MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Head and Neck (MDASI-HN-S) were compared with scores on the dysphagia-specific composite MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) and the EuroQol visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) in 714 patients who had received definitive radiotherapy ≥12 months before the survey. An MDASI-HN-S score ≥6 and an MDADI composite score

PURPOSE: This study examined the relationship between self-reported symptom severity and oral intake in long-term head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. METHODS: An observational survey study with retrospective chart abstraction was conducted. HNC patients who had completed an MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Head and Neck (MDASI-HN) questionnaire and also had clinician graded oral intake ratings (Functional Oral Intake Scale [FOIS]) were included. Correlation coefficients were computed. FOIS scores were regressed on MDASI-HN symptom items using stepwise backwards elimination for multivariate models. RESULTS: 152 survey pairings were included in the analysis (median: 44 months follow-up, range: 7-198). Per FOIS, 28% of survivors maintained a total oral diet with no restrictions, 67% reported a restricted oral diet (without tube), 3% were partially tube dependent with some oral intake, and 2% were NPO. Of the 22 symptom items, the most severe items in decreasing order were: dry mouth, difficulty swallowing\chewing, problems with mucus, tasting food, and choking/coughing. Significant bivariate correlations, after Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, were present for 8 of 22 symptoms with FOIS. On multivariate analysis, symptom severity for difficulty swallowing and problems with teeth/gums remained significantly associated with FOIS. CONCLUSIONS: Oral intake in HNC survivorship is a multidimensional issue and functional outcome that is not only impacted by dysphagia but also by dental status. Symptom drivers of oral intake likely differ in acute survivorship. Nonetheless, these findings highlight the lack of specificity in this endpoint and also the need for multidisciplinary supportive care to optimize oral intake in survivors.

Socioeconomic factors substantially impact the quality of life (QOL) of persons diagnosed with cancer, yet socioeconomic well-being seldom is included as an essential domain when overall QOL is measured. This study details the development and psychometric analysis of a scale for measuring socioeconomic well-being in persons diagnosed with cancer. Coleman's theory of social class was used to define and develop the construct. The resulting scale consisting of two subscales--Material and Social Capital-demonstrated acceptable reliability, content and construct validity at both scale and item levels, and acceptable discriminant, convergent, and incremental validity.