Head and neck cancer: recent advances and new standards of care.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Combined Modality Therapy↗
Biomedical subjects
Andy Trotti
Publications and source records attributed to Andy Trotti.
Adverse event reporting and developments in radiation biology after normal tissue injury: International Atomic Energy Agency consultation.
PURPOSE: Recent research has enhanced our understanding of radiation injury at the molecular-cellular and tissue levels; significant strides have occurred in standardization of adverse event reporting in clinical trials. In response, the International Atomic Energy Agency, through its Division of Human Health and its section for Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy, organized a consultation meeting in Atlanta (October 2, 2004) to discuss developments in radiobiology, normal tissue reactions, and adverse event reporting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Representatives from cooperative groups of African Radiation Oncology Group, Curriculo Radioterapeutica Ibero Latino Americana, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, and Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group held the meeting discussion. RESULTS: Representatives of major radiotherapy groups/organizations and prominent leaders in radiotherapy discussed current understanding of normal tissue radiobiologic effects, the design and implementation of future clinical and translational projects for normal tissue injury, and the standardization of adverse-event reporting worldwide. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus was to adopt NCI comprehensive adverse event reporting terminology and grading system (CTCAE v3.0) as the new standard for all cooperative group trials. Future plans included the implementation of coordinated research projects focusing on normal tissue biomarkers and data collection methods.
Biomarkers↗
Skin changes.
The response of skin to irradiation is highly complex and is dependent on many radiation-related, patient-related, and treatment-related factors. No standardized treatment of skin reactions related to radiation exists at this time. Ongoing research studying acute and late skin effects works to minimize reactions and improve patient quality-of-life. However, research with strong methodology is needed to determine if any management strategy is superior.
Humans↗
Concomitant boost radiation plus concurrent cisplatin for advanced head and neck carcinomas: radiation therapy oncology group phase II trial 99-14.
PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility of combining concomitant boost accelerated radiation regimen (AFX-C) with cisplatin and to assess its toxicity and the relapse pattern and survival in patients with advanced head and neck carcinoma (HNC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between April and November of 2000, 84 patients with stage III to IV HNC who met the eligibility criteria were enrolled; 76 of these patients were analyzable. Radiation consisted of 72 Gy in 42 fractions over 6 weeks (daily for 3.5 weeks, then twice a day for 2.5 weeks). Cisplatin dose was 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 22. Tumor and clinical status were assessed, and acute late toxicities were graded. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients (86%) received both radiation and chemotherapy per protocol or with minor variations. The estimated 2-year locoregional relapse and distant metastasis rates were 34.7% and 16.1%, respectively. The estimated 2-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 71.6% and 53.5%, respectively. Three patients (4%) died of complications, 19 patients (25%) had acute grade 4 toxicity, and 49 patients (64%) had acute grade 3 toxicity. The 2-year cumulative incidence of late grade 3 to 5 toxicities was 51.3%. CONCLUSION: These data showed that it was feasible to combine AFX-C with cisplatin. The compliance to therapy was high, and the locoregional control and survival rates achieved compared favorably with AFX-C alone or other concurrent chemoradiation regimens tested by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. A phase III trial comparing AFX-C plus cisplatin against standard radiation plus cisplatin is ongoing to determine whether the use of AFX-C in the concurrent chemoradiation setting further improves outcome.
Adult↗
Evaluation of new treatments in radiation oncology: are they better than standard treatments?
CONTEXT: The superiority of innovative over standard treatments is not known. To describe accurately the outcomes of innovations that are tested in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) 3 factors have to be considered: publication rate, quality of trials, and the choice of the adequate comparator intervention. OBJECTIVE: To determine the success rate of innovative treatments by assessing preferences between experimental and standard treatments according to original investigators' conclusions, determining the proportion of RCTs that achieved primary outcomes' statistical significance, and performing meta-analysis to examine if the summary point estimate favored innovative vs standard treatments. DATA SOURCES: Randomized controlled trials conducted by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG). STUDY SELECTION: All completed phase 3 trials conducted by the RTOG since its creation in 1968 until 2002. For multiple publications of the same study, we used the one with the most complete primary outcomes and with the longest follow-up information. DATA EXTRACTION: We used the US National Cancer Institute definition of completed studies to determine the publication rate. We extracted data related to publication status, methodological quality, and treatment comparisons. One investigator extracted the data from all studies and 2 independent investigators extracted randomly about 50% of the data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus during a meeting. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data on 12,734 patients from 57 trials were evaluated. The publication rate was 95%. The quality of trials was high. We found no evidence of inappropriateness of the choice of comparator. Although the investigators judged that standard treatments were preferred in 71% of the comparisons, when data were meta-analyzed innovations were as likely as standard treatments to be successful (odds ratio for survival, 1.01; 99% confidence interval, 0.96-1.07; P = .5). In contrast, treatment-related mortality was worse with innovations (odds ratio, 1.76; 99% confidence interval, 1.01-3.07; P = .008). We found no predictable pattern of treatment successes in oncology: sometimes innovative treatments are better than the standard ones and vice versa; in most cases there were no substantive differences between experimental and conventional treatments. CONCLUSION: The finding that the results in individual trials cannot be predicted in advance indicates that the system and rationale for RCTs is well preserved and that successful interventions can only be identified after an RCT is completed.
Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic↗
A multinational, randomized phase III trial of iseganan HCl oral solution for reducing the severity of oral mucositis in patients receiving radiotherapy for head-and-neck malignancy.
PURPOSE: Oral mucositis (OM) causes significant morbidity during the course of radiotherapy (RT) treatment of head-and-neck cancer. It is hypothesized that infection plays a role in the development of OM. We tested the efficacy of iseganan HCl (iseganan), a synthetic peptide with broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity, for preventing RT-associated OM. METHODS: A multinational, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial was performed on patients receiving primary RT, primary chemoradiotherapy or postoperative RT. Patients were randomized to receive iseganan oral solution plus standard-of-care oral hygiene (SOC), placebo plus SOC, or SOC alone throughout the RT administration period. The severity of OM was assessed by NCI-CTC scoring and clinical symptoms by patient questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 545 patients were randomized to the study. Nine percent of the patients in both the iseganan and placebo groups did not develop ulcerative OM (Grades 2, 3, 4) (p = 0.998) whereas only 2% of the patients receiving SOC alone remained free of oral ulceration (p = 0.049). The maximum severity of mouth pain and difficulty swallowing did not differ in patients treated with iseganan or placebo. However, patients in both intervention groups reported less mouth pain and difficulty swallowing than did patients receiving SOC alone. Nausea was the only adverse event that occurred with >/=5% increased frequency in the iseganan group than in either the placebo or SOC groups (51% vs. 42% vs. 46%). Adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation and death did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: Iseganan oral solution was safe but did not reduce the risk for developing ulcerative OM relative to placebo. Intensified oral hygiene or the administration of the vehicle used to deliver study drug in this trial appears to have reduced the risk and severity of OM. Our results suggest that antimicrobial intervention may not meaningfully affect the pathogenesis of radiation-induced OM.
Adult↗
The need for adverse effects reporting standards in oncology clinical trials.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems↗
Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for organ preservation in advanced laryngeal cancer.
BACKGROUND: Induction chemotherapy with cisplatin plus fluorouracil followed by radiotherapy is the standard alternative to total laryngectomy for patients with locally advanced laryngeal cancer. The value of adding chemotherapy to radiotherapy and the optimal timing of chemotherapy are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with locally advanced cancer of the larynx to one of three treatments: induction cisplatin plus fluorouracil followed by radiotherapy, radiotherapy with concurrent administration of cisplatin, or radiotherapy alone. The primary end point was preservation of the larynx. RESULTS: A total of 547 patients were randomly assigned to one of the three study groups. The median follow-up period was 3.8 years. At two years, the proportion of patients who had an intact larynx after radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin (88 percent) differed significantly from the proportions in the groups given induction chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy (75 percent, P=0.005) or radiotherapy alone (70 percent, P<0.001). The rate of locoregional control was also significantly better with radiotherapy and concurrent cisplatin (78 percent, vs. 61 percent with induction cisplatin plus fluorouracil followed by radiotherapy and 56 percent with radiotherapy alone). Both of the chemotherapy-based regimens suppressed distant metastases and resulted in better disease-free survival than radiotherapy alone. However, overall survival rates were similar in all three groups. The rate of high-grade toxic effects was greater with the chemotherapy-based regimens (81 percent with induction cisplatin plus fluorouracil followed by radiotherapy and 82 percent with radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin, vs. 61 percent with radiotherapy alone). The mucosal toxicity of concurrent radiotherapy and cisplatin was nearly twice as frequent as the mucosal toxicity of the other two treatments during radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with laryngeal cancer, radiotherapy with concurrent administration of cisplatin is superior to induction chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy or radiotherapy alone for laryngeal preservation and locoregional control.
Adult↗
P105 as a prognostic indicator in patients irradiated for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer: a clinical/laboratory correlative analysis of RTOG-9003.
PURPOSE: In a previous retrospective study, p105 AD, a proliferation-associated nuclear antigen density (AD), was found to be an independent prognostic factor for patients irradiated for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer. We sought to confirm this finding by analyzing patients entered on RTOG 9003, a Phase III randomized trial of altered fractionation radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Paraffin blocks of pretreatment biopsies of the primary tumor of patients with Stage III or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, or supraglottic larynx, or Stage II squamous cell carcinoma of the hypopharynx or base of tongue entered on RTOG 9003 were prospectively collected at patient entry. From these paraffin blocks, areas of tumor were selected based on histologic examinations and sectioned. Nuclear suspensions were then prepared and processed for p105 antibody and DNA staining. Flow cytometric quantification of p105 labeling indices and DNA content were then performed for correlation with local-regional control and survival. RESULTS: Paraffin blocks of tumor biopsies from 457 of 1073 patients entered were available for p105 determination. There was no significant difference in pretreatment characteristics between patients who had paraffin blocks available or not available. The median (range) of p105 labeling index (LI-C), p105 labeling index of cells in S phase (p105 LI-S), and p105 AD were 56 (range: 6-99), 8.255 (range: 0.913-23), and 67 (range: 5-364), respectively. Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors showed that T stage, N stage, Karnofsky performance status, and fractionation schedule were significant for local-regional control (p < 0.0001, 0.0011, <0.0001, and 0.007, respectively) and T stage, N stage, Karnofsky performance status, and tumor grade were significant for survival (p = 0.018, 0.002, <0.0001, and 0.0058, respectively). Neither p105 LI-C nor p105 LI-S nor p105 AD nor DNA ploidy was significant for local-regional control or survival. CONCLUSION: p105 labeling indices, antigen density, and DNA ploidy do not predict the outcome of patients irradiated for advanced squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck.
Antigens, Neoplasm↗
Outcome of salvage total laryngectomy following organ preservation therapy: the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 91-11.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of morbidity, mortality, and disease control for patients requiring salvage total laryngectomy (TL) following organ preservation therapy. DESIGN: Patients entered into a 3-arm randomized prospective multi-institutional trial for laryngeal preservation who required TL following initial treatment. SETTING: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 91-11 trial for laryngeal preservation. PATIENTS: From 1992 to 2000, 517 evaluable patients were randomized to receive chemotherapy followed by radiation therapy (arm 1), concomitant chemotherapy and radiation therapy (arm 2), or radiation therapy alone (arm 3). RESULTS: Overall, TL was required in 129 patients. The incidence was 28%, 16%, and 31% in arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P =.002). Of these, 7 patients (5%) required TL for aspiration or necrosis. Following TL, the incidence of major and minor complications ranged from 52% to 59% and did not differ significantly among the 3 arms. Pharyngocutaneous fistula was lowest in arm 3 (15%) and highest in arm 2 (30%) (P>.05). There was 1 perioperative death. Local-regional control following salvage TL was 74% for arms 1 and 2 and 90% for arm 3. At 24 months, the overall survival was 69% (arm 1), 71% (arm 2), and 76% (arm 3) (P>.73). CONCLUSIONS: Laryngectomy following organ preservation treatment is associated with acceptable morbidity. Perioperative mortality is low but up to one third of patients will develop a pharyngocutaneous fistula. Local-regional control is excellent for this group of patients. Survival following salvage TL was not influenced by the initial organ preservation treatment.
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell↗
Mucositis incidence, severity and associated outcomes in patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy: a systematic literature review.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To determine the frequency of mucositis and associated outcomes in patients receiving radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck cancer through a systematic review of recently published literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to the study protocol, databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (English only, 1996-1999) of patients with head and neck cancer receiving RT with or without chemotherapy that reported one or more outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies (n=6181 patients) met inclusion criteria. Mucositis was defined using a variety of scoring systems. The mean incidence was 80%. Over one-half of patients (56%) who received altered fractionation RT (RT-AF) experienced severe mucositis (grades 3-4) compared to 34% of patients who received conventional RT. Rates of hospitalization due to mucositis, reported in three studies (n=700), were 16% overall and 32% for RT-AF patients. Eleven percent of patients had RT regimens interrupted or modified because of mucositis in five studies (n=1267) reporting this outcome. Data insufficiency or heterogeneity prohibited analysis of mucositis severity and other associated outcomes, such as oral pain, dysphagia and opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: Mucositis is a frequent, severe toxicity in patients treated with RT for head and neck cancer. While it appears that mucositis may lead to hospitalization and treatment interruptions, its overall impact on outcomes has not been adequately investigated.
Adolescent↗
CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment.
Multiple systems have been developed for grading the adverse effects (AEs) of cancer treatment. The National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) system has substantially evolved since its inception in 1983. The most recent version, CTCAE v3.0 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0) represents the first comprehensive, multimodality grading system for reporting the acute and late effects of cancer treatment. The new CTC requires changes in the application of AE criteria including new guidelines regarding late effects, surgical and pediatric effects, multimodality issues, and for reporting the duration of an effect. It builds on the strengths of previous systems, represents a considerable effort among hundreds of participants, and signifies an international collaboration and consensus of the oncology research community. This article updates recent progress in the evolution of adverse effects grading systems and reviews the development of CTCAE v3.0.
Academies and Institutes↗
Adverse effects: a Pandora's box for oncology.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Ethics, Medical↗
Measurement of quality of life in head and neck cancer patients utilizing the quality of life radiation therapy questionnaire.
BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QOL) measures give patients the possibility to express subjective changes in wellbeing. We aimed to translate the radiation specific quality of life questionnaire (QOL-RTI) and the companion head and neck module (H&N) questionnaire into German and to test its reliability, validity and sensitivity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After translation and final revisions based on qualitative interviews with ten patients, 97 head and neck cancer patients were screened for eligibility. Patients answered the 38 items questionnaire at baseline and twice in week 4 of radiotherapy for test-retest reliability. Internal consistency was calculated using Chronbach's alpha. Patients also completed the functional assessment of cancer tool plus head and neck (FACT-G plus H&N) for concurrent validity. Item analyses were performed to test the sensitivity. RESULTS: Chronbach's alpha yielded alpha = 0.85 for the QOL-RTI and alpha = 0.80 for the H&N module, test-retest reliability scores were r = 0.87 and r = 0.83, respectively. The correlation of the QOL-RTI plus H&N and the FACT plus H&N was r = 0.79. Questionnaire sensitivity was supported by significant changes in the mean score of 45.8% of the QOL-RTI items and 78.6% of the H&N items between baseline and week 4 of radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The German version of the QOL-RTI was shown to be a reliable, valid and sensitive tool to assess the quality of life of patients undergoing radiotherapy. The H&N module is useful for patients undergoing treatment for head and neck cancer.
Adult↗
The evolution and application of toxicity criteria.
The assessment and reporting of toxicity plays a central role in oncology. The foundation of toxicity reporting is the toxicity criteria system. Multiple systems have been developed and have evolved substantially since first introduced more than 20 years ago. The wide adoption of a standardized criteria system can facilitate comparison between institutions and clinical trials. The Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) system was revised and expanded substantially in 1997 and now includes acute radiation criteria as part of multimodality grading. In contrast to the progress made in standardizing acute effects, the current use of multiple late effects grading systems by different groups hinders comparability of clinical trials, impedes the development of toxicity interventions, and encumbers the proper recognition and reporting of late effects. Just as the revised CTC has provided a new common standard for the grading of acute effects, a similar effort is needed in the late effects area. The creation of a unified late effects system is under active development.
Humans↗
Complications of radiation therapy for head and neck cancers. The patient's perspective.
Newer treatments for head and neck cancers, including altered fractionation and the use of concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy, may provide better local-regional tumor control rates; however, patients may experience more frequent and more severe acute toxicities that result in considerable suffering. Through this study, we sought a better understanding of patients' experiences when undergoing radiotherapy. Personal interviews were conducted with 33 individuals who had received radiotherapy for head and neck cancers. These individuals described their treatment experiences and identified the most troublesome and debilitating side effects of radiotherapy. Overall, lethargy and weakness, dry mouth, mouth sores and pain, taste changes, and sore throat were the most frequently reported troublesome or debilitating side effects. The single most debilitating side effect was oropharyngeal mucositis that was characterized by patients as sore throat, and mouth sores and pain; both negatively affected the patient's ability to eat and drink, causing many patients to experience significant weight loss. Trends toward more aggressive management of head and neck cancers underscore the need for new and effective therapies for oropharyngeal mucositis occurring in patients receiving radiotherapy.
Adult↗
Assessment of toxicity in cooperative oncology clinical trials: the long and short of it.
Cancer therapy is associated with inherent adverse effects and the need for complete, consistent and accurate reporting of toxicity is paramount in multicenter cooperative oncology clinical trials. Accurate toxicity information is essential to weigh the costs and benefits associated with new treatment regimens. A major issue faced by investigators and clinical trial coordinators today is the lack of clear directions regarding what method should be used in toxicity assessment in cooperative oncology clinical trials. Research personnel are faced with two options: (1) to be proactive and use a "directed" method of toxicity assessment or (2) to simply follow the data trail and report selected toxicity based only on routine documentation in the chart. The differences between these two approaches may be immense depending on one's perspective. The purpose of this article is to review how the current methods of toxicity assessment evolved and discuss issues and concerns in toxicity assessment in a challenging healthcare environment where clinical trials continue to increase in complexity and workload through the use of novel and multimodality therapies. The potential implications for toxicity data management practices, data quality, patient care management and resource utilization are discussed.
Antineoplastic Agents↗