Head & Neck Flashcards
How is HPV status important ?
A/w >90% of HPV-related HNSCC
HPV is a small dsDNA virus
HPV E6 and E7 oncogenes bind and inactivate p53 and pRb.
- p53 and pRb are tumor suppressor genes
- unchecked cellular replication hence results
Inactivation of pRb result in over expression of p16
- p16 is an upstream tumor suppressor protein
Viral oncoproteins E6 and E7 inactive main Tumors suppressor genes resulting in:
- proliferation
- overexpression of p16
HPV + relates to:
- higher response to chemotherapy or ChemoRT
- improved OS
- improved PFS
What are the treatment goals for resectable H&N disease?
1) Improve locoregional control
2) Improve OS
3) Organ and function preservation for appropriate patients
- Laryngeal
- Hypopharyngeal
- Oropharyngeal
Which H&N cancers are a/w higher likelihood of micromets at diagnosis?
Nasopharynx
Hypopharynx
- Hence they require better systemic control to improve survival
What are the strategies that can be used to improve locoregional control and/or survival in stage III/IV disease?
1) Altered fractionation radiation
2) Systemic treatment
- radiosensitisation to improve locoregional control
- reduction of tumor bulk with induction therapy to facilitate locoregional therapy
- improve systemic control
- select patients for organ preservation (Larynx/hypopharynx)
What is the evidence for concurrent high-dose single agent CDDP to conventional RT for H&N cancers?
Aldestein JCO 2003
Aim of study: Test the benefit of adding chemo to RT in Unresectable SCC H&N
N=300 (study closed early due to not enough enrollment)
3arms:
A) = control arm = Single daily fractionated RT, 70Gy at 2Gy/day
B) = Identical Group A RT + CDDP on D1, 22 43
C) = Chemoradiotherapy:
- 3# of D1-4 CI 5FU (1000) + Bolus CDDP (75) D1
- Q4w
- RT at 2Gy/day split between first chemo course and 3rd chemo course (total 60-70Gy)
- Chemo break is to allow for possibility of surgical resection
RESULTS:
3y OS 20% (A) vs 35% (B) vs 30% (C)
3y DFS 50% (CDDP/RT) vs 30% (RT alone)
Tell me about the Forastiere study
RTOG 91-11
Forastiere NEJM 2003
Question:
1) value of adding chemo to RT?
2) Optimal timing of chemo
Locally advanced cancer of larynx patients, n=550 3 arms: 1) Induction CDDP/5FU --> RT 2) Concurrent CDDP/RT 3) RT alone
RESULTS med f/u almost 4 y:
1) Intact larynx at 2 years: 90% (concurrent) vs 75%(induction) vs 70% (RT alone)
2) 5y Rate of locoregional control 80% (Concurrent) vs 70%(induction) vs 65% (RT)
3) Better DFS when chemo added
4) OS similar I all groups
5) High-grade toxic effects greatest with chemo-based regimens
- mucosal toxicity of concurrent ChemoRT nearly 2x that of the other 2 regimens
6) 5y Laryngeal preservation rate 80%(CRT) vs 70% (IC) vs 65%(RT)
What is the MACH-NC study about?
Pignon Radiotherapy and Oncology 2009
Meta-analysis of chemo in H&N cancer
93 RCTs, 17 000 patients
Aim: To confirm that chemotherapy improved survival
RESULTS:
1) Chemo added additional 4.5% at 5 years in terms of OS
2) Concurrent ChemoRT better; HR 0.8 and absolute benefit of 6.5% at 5 years
What is the ideal treatment for maxillary/oral cavity cancers?
Surgery + adjuvantRT
Btwn Surgery and ChemoRT, - Med DFS 5.5y (Sx) Vs 1y 5y DFS 55% vs 15% - Med OS 5.5y (Sx) vs 1y 5 OS 55% vs 20%
In Oropharyngeal Ca, what is preferred? ChemoRT or surgery?
No difference noted in terms of DFS and OS
Is there a value of induction CDDP/5FU (PF) in Unresectable disease?
Yes. Zorat et al. JNCI 2004
–> 10% benefit 10y OS
Phase 3 study
1) Locoregional treatment alone
2) 4# Induction PF–> Locoregional treatment
- Locoreginal treatment =
- Resectable disease = Sx + Adjuvant RT
- Unresetable disease = RT alone
RESULTS:
1) Resectable disease: No difference in OS at 5 and 10y
2) Unresectable disease:
- 5y OS 20% vs 10%
- 10y OS 15% vs 5%
What is the evidence for TPF?
1) TAX 324 Posner et al NEJM 2007
N=500
Stage III/IV, no distant mets
Considered to be Unresectable OR were candidates for organ preservation
2 arms:
1) Induction TPF –> ChemoRT with weekly Carbo
2) Induction PF –> ChemoRT with weekly Carbo
RESULTS: 3y OS 60% (TPF) vs 50%(PF) Med OS 70m (TPF) vs 30m Better locoregional control in TPF Incidence of distant mets ~ ORR 90% (CR 40%) ================
2) TAX 323 Vermoken NEJM 2007
N=350 Stage III/IV, no distant mets 2 arms: 1) 4# Induction TPF --> RT 2) 4# Induction PF --> RT
RESULTS: Med PFS 11m (TPF) vs 8m Med OS 19m vs 14.5m Rates of death from toxic effects: 2% (TPF) vs 5.5% (PF) ORR 70% vs 55% (PF)
What is the evidence for TPF, specifically for organ preservation?
Pointreau et al JNCI 2009
Aim: Determine if adding Docetaxel to PF could increase the Larynx preservation rate.
N=200 Larynx and hypopharynx cancer 2 arms: 1) 3# TPF 2) 3# PF
Those who respond:
- RT +/- additional chemo
Those who DID NOT Respond:
- Total laryngectomy –> RT +/- chemo
RESULTS after 3y f/u:
3y larynx preservation rate 70% (TPF) vs 55%
ORR 80% (TPF) vs 60%
OS~ 60%
What is the role of Cetuximab combined with RT?
Bonner et al Lancet Oncol 2010
N=400
Locally advanced SCC of Oropharynx, hypopharynx, larynx with measurable disease.
2 arms:
1) H&N RT for 6-7 weeks
2) H&N RT + weekly Cetuximab
- 400mg/m2 initial dose, followed by 7 weekly doses of 250mg/m2
RT consists of 1 of 3 regimens:
- once daily RT at 2Gy/day to total 70Gy gross disease
- twice-daily RT 1.2Gy in 2 separate fractions each day, 6h or more apart, total 72-77Gy
- 72Gy/42# + concomitant boost RT 18Gy for 30#, with a 2nd fraction 1.5Gy >6 hours after the first fraction during the last 12 days of tax.
Results:
- Med OS 50m (Cetux) vs 30m
- 5y OS 45% vs 35%
- Cetuximab OS significantly improved in those who experienced an acne inform rash of at least G2 severity
- Seems to benefit oropharynx most
- Once daily seems to do worst.
Any value in adding Cetuximab to Concurrent CDDP/RT?
No. Ang KK JCO 2014
RTOG 0522
B/g: CDDP OR Cetux + RT improved OS in Stage III/IV HNSCC
Cetux+platinum also increased OS in met HNC
QTN: whether adding Cetux to CDDP/RT will improve PFS
N=900
2 arms:
1) Cetux+ CDDP/RT
2) CDDP/RT
RESULTS:
1) Cetux resulted in more frequent interruptions in RT 25% vs 15%
2) Cetux resulted in more G3/4 radiation mucositis 40% vs 30%
3) No differences in 30-day mortality/locoregional failure/distant met/3y PFS/3y OS
- 3y PFS ~60%
- 3y OS ~75%
4) p16+ had better 3y PFS 70% vs 50% and OS 85% vs 60%
Give me some General conclusions of the Staging for H&N Cas
T1N0M0 = Stage I T2N0M0 = Stage II T3N0M0 = Stage II T4aN0M0 = Stage IVA T4bN0M0 = Stage IVB
TxN2M0 = Stage IVA TxN3M0 = Stage IVB
M1 = Stage IVC
Any evidence for TKIs?
Yes. Sewart in JCO 2009
RECURRENT/MET setting of HNSCC
3 arms:
1) Gefitinib 250 mg/day
2) Gefitinib 500 mg/day
3) IV MTX 40 mg/m2 weekly
RESULTS: Med OS: 5.5m vs 6m vs 6.5 m ORR 3% vs 7.5% vs 4% Tumor-hemorrhage-type events with Gefitinib. 9% with 250mg/d dose and 11.5% with 500mg/day dose. QoL 13.5% vs 18% vs 6%
Tell me about the PARADIGM study
Haddad et al Lancet Oncol 2013
Aim: to compare induction chemo–> CRT vs CRT alone
Treatment naive, non-met newly Dx HN CA
Unresectable or low surgical durability due to T3/4 or N2/3 (Except T1N2)
Included also if they were for organ preservation
n= 150
2 arms:
1) 3# Induction TPF –> CRT
- CRT with either Docetaxel/Carboplatin
2) CRT with 2# Bolus CDDP
RESULTS:
1) 3yOS 75% (Induction group) vs 80% [trend]
2) FN higher in induction chemo group
What led to the approval of TPF for pts with resectable and Unresectable HNSCC?
1) TAX 323
2) TAX 324
3) GORTEC laryngeal study
What do you consider for a pt for organ preservation?
1) Patient characteristics:
- voice quality
- swallow
- Respiratory function
- social support, age
2) Tumor characteristics
- TNM
- cartilage involvement
What is EUA useful for?
Assess superior and inferior extent of disease
Assess for involvement of pre-vertebral fascia
What constitutes Unresectable disease?
Tumor involvement of the following sites would be worrying:
- involvement of pterygoid muscles, esp when a/w severe trismus or pterygopalatine fossa involvement with Cranial neuropathy
- gross extension of tumor to skull base
- direct extension to the superior nasopharynx or deep extension into Eustachian tube and lateral nasopharyngeal walls
- invasion/encasing of common or internal carotid artery. (Surrounding vessel by 270 degrees or greater)
- direct extension of neck disease to involve external skin
- direct extension to mediastinal structures, pre vertebral fascia or cervical vertebrae
- presence of sub dermal mets
What are the trials supporting concurrent ChemoRT?
Aldestein study
MACH-NC meta-analysis
What are the trials assessing induction vs CCRT?
Hitt study
PARADIM
ASCO Trial by Grazia presented ASCO 2014
DeCIDE study presented ASCO 2012
Tell me about the Hitt study comparing induction chemo regimens
Hitt JCO 2005
Aim: Compare 2 induction regimens
N=400, tx-naive, Stage III/IV locally advanced HNC 2 arms: 1) CF - CDDP (100) D1, CI FU(1000) D1-5 2) PCF - Paclitaxel (175) D1 - CDDP (100) D2 - CI 5FU (500) D2-6
Both regimens Q21 days, for 3#
Those with CR or PR >80% then received additional CRT
- CDDP (100) D1, 22, 43 +70Gy)
RESULTS:
CR 15% (CF) vs 35% (PCF)
Median TTTF 12m (CF) vs 20m (PCF)
OS 37m (CF) vs 43m (PCF) [Trend]
- but significant when looking at pts with Unresectable disease 26m vs 36m
CF patients with higher occurrence of G2-4 mucositis 50% vs 15%
