De-Escalation After DE-ESCALATE and RTOG 1016: A Head and Neck Cancer InterGroup Framework for Future De-Escalation Studies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mehanna H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7392745 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Treatment of locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma involves a multidisciplinary approach that combines surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic therapy. These curative strategies are associated with significant acute and long-term toxicities. With the emergence of human papillomavirus (HPV) as an etiologic factor associated primarily with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, higher cure rates juxtaposed with substantial treatment-related morbidity and mortality has led to interest in de-escalated therapeutic strategies, with the goal of optimizing oncologic outcomes while reducing treatment-related toxicity. Currently explored strategies include replacing, reducing, or omitting cytotoxic chemotherapy; reducing dose or volume of radiotherapy; and incorporation of less-invasive surgical approaches. Potential biomarkers to select patients for treatment de-escalation include clinical risk stratification, adjuvant de-escalation based on pathologic features, response to induction therapy, and molecular markers. The optimal patient selection and de-escalation strategy is critically important in the evolving treatment of locoregional head and neck cancer. Recently, two large phase III trials, RTOG 1016 and De-ESCALaTE, failed to de-escalate treatment in HPV-associated head and neck cancer by demonstrating inferior outcomes by replacing cisplatin with cetuximab in combination with radiation. This serves as a cautionary tale in the future design of de-escalation trials in this patient population, which will need to leverage toxicity and efficacy endpoints. Our review summarizes completed and ongoing de-escalation trials in head and neck cancer, with particular emphasis on biomarkers for patient selection and clinical trial design. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The toxicity associated with standard multimodality treatment for head and neck cancer underscores the need to seek less-intensive therapies with a reduced long-term symptom burden through de-escalated treatment paradigms that minimize toxicity while maintaining oncologic control in appropriately selected patients. Controversy regarding the optimal de-escalation strategy and criteria for patient selection for de-escalated therapy has led to multiple parallel strategies undergoing clinical investigation. Well-designed trials that optimize multimodal strategies are needed. Given the absence of positive randomized trials testing de-escalated therapy to date, practicing oncologists should exercise caution and administer established standard-of-care therapy outside the context of a clinical trial.
| S-EPMC7794179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In numerous social species, males direct aggression towards female group members during intergroup fights, and this behaviour is commonly thought to function as mate guarding, even though males often target non-receptive females. In studying intergroup fights in a wild population of vervet monkeys, we found that male intragroup aggression was primarily directed towards individuals who had either just finished exhibiting, or were currently attempting to instigate intergroup aggression. Targeted females were less likely to instigate intergroup aggression in the future, indicating that male intragroup aggression functioned as coercion (when directed towards those who were currently trying to instigate a fight) and punishment (when directed towards those who had recently fought). These manipulative tactics effectively prevented intergroup encounters from escalating into fights and often de-escalated ongoing conflicts. Males who were likely sires were those most likely to use punishment/coercion, particularly when they were wounded, and, therefore, less able to protect vulnerable offspring should a risky intergroup fight erupt. This work, along with our previous finding that females use punishment and rewards to recruit males into participating in intergroup fights, highlights the inherent conflict of interest that exists between the sexes, as well as the role that social incentives can play in resolving this conflict. Furthermore, unlike other studies which have found punishment to be used asymmetrically between partners, these works represent a novel example of reciprocal punishment in a non-human animal.
| S-EPMC6015864 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the results of clinical and pathological staging for a large cohort of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and to examine patterns and ramifications of the disparity between staging methods.DesignProspective inception cohort (median follow-up, 7 years).SettingMulti-institutional cooperative group study (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 4393/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9614) involving 17 academic medical centers.PatientsA total of 560 patients with new-onset or recurrent HNSCC enrolled during a 7-year period.InterventionsSurgical resection with curative intent with or without adjuvant or previous radiotherapy or chemotherapy.Main outcome measuresClinical staging and pathological staging and the component TN tumor categories were compared with overall and disease-specific survival. Association of survival with staging was derived by means of the proportional hazards model.ResultsOf the 501 cases in which both clinical and pathological staging was available, a disparity was found between at least 1 component tumor category assigned by the 2 methods in almost 50% of cases. Both methods showed a strong association of stage with overall survival for the cohort at large. However, pathological nodal category was a superior predictor (P < .001 vs P = .005), whereas there was an advantage to pathological tumor category in predicting disease-specific survival (P = .01).ConclusionsBoth staging methods are useful in predicting survival, whereas information gained at neck dissection regarding nodal metastases provides some refinement in prognostic results. These findings demonstrate the need for enhanced methods of tumor assessment and apparent benefit of data gathered at neck dissection for accurate disease assessment and stratification.
| S-EPMC2846171 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oncological outcomes for head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients are still unsatisfactory, especially for advanced tumor stages. Besides the moderate survival rates, the prevalence of severe treatment-induced normal tissue toxicities is high after multimodal cancer treatments, both causing significant morbidity and decreasing quality of life of surviving patients. Therefore, risk-adapted and individualized treatment approaches are urgently needed for HNSCC patients to optimize the therapeutic gain. It has been a well-known fact that especially HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) patients exhibit an excellent prognosis and may therefore be subject to overtreatment, resulting in long-term treatment-related toxicities. Regarding the superior prognosis of HPV-positive OSCC patients, treatment de-escalation strategies are currently investigated in several clinical trials, and HPV-positive OSCC may potentially serve as a model for treatment de-escalation also for other types of HNSCC. We performed a literature search for both published and ongoing clinical trials and critically discussed the presented concepts and results. Radiotherapy dose or volume reduction, omission or modification of concomitant chemotherapy, and usage of induction chemotherapy are common treatment de-escalation strategies that are pursued in clinical trials for biologically selected subgroups of HNSCC patients. While promising data have been reported from various Phase II trials, evidence from Phase III de-escalation trials is either lacking or has failed to demonstrate comparable outcomes for de-escalated treatments. Therefore, further data and a refinement of biological HNSCC stratification are required before deescalated radiation treatments can be recommended outside of clinical trials.
| S-EPMC8124930 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Previous analysis of this Intergroup trial demonstrated that with a median follow-up among surviving patients of 45.9 months, the concurrent postoperative administration of cisplatin and radiation therapy improved local-regional control and disease-free survival of patients who had high-risk resectable head-and-neck carcinomas. With a minimum of 10 years of follow-up potentially now available for all patients, these results are updated here to examine long-term outcomes.A total of 410 analyzable patients who had high-risk resected head-and-neck cancers were prospectively randomized to receive either radiation therapy (RT: 60 Gy in 6 weeks) or identical RT plus cisplatin, 100 mg/m(2)i.v. on days 1, 22, and 43 (RT + CT).At 10 years, the local-regional failure rates were 28.8% vs 22.3% (P=.10), disease-free survival was 19.1% vs 20.1% (P=.25), and overall survival was 27.0% vs 29.1% (P=.31) for patients treated by RT vs RT + CT, respectively. In the unplanned subset analysis limited to patients who had microscopically involved resection margins and/or extracapsular spread of disease, local-regional failure occurred in 33.1% vs 21.0% (P=.02), disease-free survival was 12.3% vs 18.4% (P=.05), and overall survival was 19.6% vs 27.1% (P=.07), respectively.At a median follow-up of 9.4 years for surviving patients, no significant differences in outcome were observed in the analysis of all randomized eligible patients. However, analysis of the subgroup of patients who had either microscopically involved resection margins and/or extracapsular spread of disease showed improved local-regional control and disease-free survival with concurrent administration of chemotherapy. The remaining subgroup of patients who were enrolled only because they had tumor in 2 or more lymph nodes did not benefit from the addition of CT to RT.
| S-EPMC3465463 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe severity of COVID-19, as well as the speed and scale of its spread, has posed a global challenge. Countries around the world have implemented stringent non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) to control transmission and prevent health systems from being overwhelmed. These NPI have had profound negative social and economic impacts. With the timeline to worldwide vaccine roll-out being uncertain, governments need to consider to what extent they need to implement and how to de-escalate these NPI. This rapid review collates de-escalation criteria reported in the literature to provide a guide to criteria that could be used as part of de-escalation strategies globally.MethodsWe reviewed literature published since 2000 relating to pandemics and infectious disease outbreaks. The searches included Embase.com (includes Embase and Medline), LitCovid, grey literature searching, reference harvesting and citation tracking. Over 1,700 documents were reviewed, with 39 documents reporting de-escalation criteria included in the final analysis. Concepts retrieved through a thematic analysis of the included documents were interlinked to build a conceptual dynamic de-escalation framework.ResultsWe identified 52 de-escalation criteria, the most common of which were clustered under surveillance (cited by 43 documents, 10 criteria e.g. ability to actively monitor confirmed cases and contact tracing), health system capacity (cited by 30 documents, 11 criteria, e.g. ability to treat all patients within normal capacity) and epidemiology (cited by 28 documents, 7 criteria, e.g. number or changes in case numbers). De-escalation is a gradual and bi-directional process, and resurgence of infections or emergence of variants of concerns can lead to partial or full re-escalation(s) of response and control measures in place. Hence, it is crucial to rely on a robust public health surveillance system.ConclusionsThis rapid review focusing on de-escalation within the context of COVID-19 provides a conceptual framework and a guide to criteria that countries can use to formulate de-escalation plans.
| S-EPMC8444163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Increasingly, squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx (OPSCC) is attributable to transformation resulting from high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Such cancers are significantly more responsive to treatment than traditional tobacco- and alcohol-associated squamous cell cancers of the head and neck. Conventional management with definitive chemoradiation, surgery and adjuvant radiation, or radiation given with altered fractionation schemes, while effective, incurs long-term morbidity that escalates with treatment intensity and significantly impairs quality of life. Recent trials have suggested that less intensive treatment regimens may achieve similar efficacy with decreased toxicity. In this article, we review the primary strategies used for de-escalation of treatment, which include the reduction of radiation dose, substitution and/or elimination of concurrent radiosensitising chemotherapy, and the use of minimally invasive surgery. We discuss the rationale behind these approaches and the preliminary data demonstrating the success of de-escalation, as well as potential considerations raised by treatment de-intensification in HPV-associated OPSCC.
| S-EPMC5734050 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) are at considerable risk for death, with 5-year relative survival rates of approximately 60%. The profound multifaceted deficiencies in cell-mediated immunity that persist in most patients after treatment may be related to the high rates of treatment failure and second primary malignancies. Radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy commonly have severe acute and long-term side effects on immune responses. The development of immunotherapies reflects growing awareness that certain immune system deficiencies specific to HNSCC and some other cancers may contribute to the poor long-term outcomes. Systemic cell-mediated immunotherapy is intended to activate the entire immune system and mount a systemic and/or locoregional antitumor response. The delivery of cytokines, either by single cytokines, for example, interleukin-2, interleukin-12, interferon-gamma, interferon-alpha, or by a biologic mix of multiple cytokines, such as IRX-2, may result in tumor rejection and durable immune responses. Targeted immunotherapy makes use of monoclonal antibodies or vaccines. All immunotherapies for HNSCC except cetuximab remain investigational, but a number of agents whose efficacy and tolerability are promising have entered phase 2 or phase 3 development.
| S-EPMC2723756 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radiotherapy has long been the mainstay of treatment for patients with head and neck cancer and has traditionally involved a stage-dependent strategy whereby all patients with the same TNM stage receive the same therapy. We believe there is a substantial opportunity to improve radiotherapy delivery beyond just technological and anatomical precision. In this Series paper, we explore several new ideas that could improve understanding of the phenotypic and genotypic differences that exist between patients and their tumours. We discuss how exploiting these differences and taking advantage of precision medicine tools-such as genomics, radiomics, and mathematical modelling-could open new doors to personalised radiotherapy adaptation and treatment. We propose a new treatment shift that moves away from an era of empirical dosing and fractionation to an era focused on the development of evidence to guide personalisation and biological adaptation of radiotherapy. We believe these approaches offer the potential to improve outcomes and reduce toxicity.
| S-EPMC7771279 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although there is ample literature reporting on the identification of molecular biomarkers for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, none is currently recommended for routine clinical use. A major reason for this lack of progress is the difficulty in designing studies in head and neck cancer to clearly establish the clinical utility of biomarkers. Consequently, biomarker studies frequently stall at the initial discovery phase. In this article, we focus on biomarkers for use in clinical management, including selection of therapy. Using several contemporary examples, we identify some of the common deficiencies in study design that hinder success in biomarker development for this disease area, and we suggest some potential solutions. The purpose of this article is to provide guidance that can assist investigators to more efficiently move promising biomarkers in head and neck cancer from discovery to clinical practice
| S-EPMC4115457 | biostudies-literature