Explore the vast range of titles available.

The incidence of human papillomavirus-positive (HPV + ) head and neck cancer (HNC), particularly oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC), is rising globally. Although radio- or chemo-radiotherapy yields better outcomes for patients with HPV + tumors compared to those with HPV-negative tumors, these treatments do not cure all cases and are associated with significant side effects. This underscores the need for more personalized therapy. To help individualize treatment, we evaluated the presence of cell-free HPV DNA (cfHPV-DNA) in plasma collected before, during, and after therapy in patients with HPV + HNC and correlated cfHPV-DNA levels with clinical characteristics, HPV genotype, and treatment response. 267 longitudinal plasma samples were collected from 83 patients with HPV + HNC/cancer of unknown primary, at diagnosis/recurrence, during treatment and follow-ups, and tested for cfHPV-DNA with droplet digital PCR assaying for HPV16, 18, 33 or 35.39. 76/81 (93.8%) eligible diagnostic or recurrence samples tested positive for cfHPV-DNA, while a diagnostic sample was unavailable/or had inadequate cfDNA in 2/83 cases. cfHPV-DNA levels declined in most patients by 3–4 weeks post-radiotherapy initiation and became undetectable (fast responders) in approximately 30% of cases. By 3–6 months post-treatment, most patients had no detectable cfHPV-DNA. To date, no new recurrences have been documented, although two patients were unresponsive to therapy. Most HPV + OPSCC patients were cfHPV-DNA-positive at diagnosis and cleared their cfHPV-DNA upon treatment, but the speed of clearance varied depending on tumor sub-site, patient characteristics and treatment. The data suggest that follow-up with cfHPV-DNA is a promising clinical approach and should be expanded to include more patients and longer time periods.

Background Local recurrence is the most common pattern of failure in head and neck cancer. It can therefore be hypothesised that some of these patients would benefit from an intensified local treatment, such as radiation dose escalation of the primary tumour. This study compares treatment and toxicity outcomes from two different boost modalities in oropharyngeal cancer: simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and brachytherapy boost. Methods Two hundred and forty-four consecutive patients treated with > 72 Gy for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma between 2011 and 2018 at our institution were retrospectively analysed. Data on side effects were collected from a local quality registry and supplemented with a review of medical records. Patients receiving a brachytherapy boost first had external beam radiotherapy consisting of 68 Gy in 2 Gy fractions to the gross tumour volume (GTV), and elective radiotherapy to the neck bilaterally. The brachytherapy boost was typically given using pulsed dose rate, 15 fractions and 0.56–0.66 Gy per fraction [total dose in EQD2 = 75.4–76.8 Gy (α/β = 10)]. The typical dose escalated radiotherapy with external beam radiotherapy only, was delivered using SIB with 74,8 Gy in 2.2 Gy fractions [EQD2 = 76.0 Gy (α/β = 10)] to the primary tumour, 68 Gy in 2 Gy fractions to GTV + 10 mm margin and elective radiotherapy to the neck bilaterally. Results Dose escalation by SIB was given to 111 patients and brachytherapy boost to 134 patients. The most common type of cancer was base of tongue (55%), followed by tonsillar cancer (42%). The majority of patients had T3- or T4-tumours and 84% were HPV-positive. The 5-year OS was 72,4% (95% CI 66.9–78.3) and the median follow-up was 6.1 years. Comparing the two different dose escalation modalities we found no significant differences in OS or PFS and these results remained after a propensity-score matched analysis was performed. The analysis of grade ≥ 3 side effects showed no significant differences between the two different dose escalation techniques. Conclusions We found no significant differences in survival or grade ≥ 3 side effects comparing simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost as alternative dose escalation modalities in the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer.

Re-irradiation in head and neck cancer is challenging, and cumulative dose constraints and dose/volume data are scarce. In this study, we present dose/volume data for patients re-irradiated for head and neck cancer and explore the correlations of cumulative dose to organs at risk and severe side effects. We analyzed 54 patients re-irradiated for head and neck cancer between 2011 and 2017. Organs at risk were delineated and dose/volume data were collected from cumulative treatment plans of all included patients. Receiver–operator characteristics (ROC) analysis assessed the association between dose/volume parameters and the risk of toxicity. The ROC-curve for a logistic model of carotid blowout vs. maximum doses to the carotid arteries showed AUC = 0.92 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.00) and a cut-off value of 119 Gy (sensitivity 1.00/specificity 0.89). The near-maximum dose to bones showed an association with the risk of osteoradionecrosis: AUC = 0.74 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.95) and a cut-off value of 119 Gy (sensitivity 1.00/specificity 0.52). Our analysis showed an association between cumulative dose to organs at risk and the risk of developing osteoradionecrosis and carotid blowout, and our results support the existing dose constraint for the carotid arteries of 120 Gy. The confirmation of these dose–response relationships will contribute to further improvements of re-irradiation strategies.

An aetiological role of human papillomavirus (HPV) and/or human polyomaviruses (HPyVs) has been proposed in adenoid cystic carcinoma (AdCC). Moreover, HPV-related multiphenotypic carcinoma (HMSC) was recently introduced as an emerging entity of the sinonasal region. Here, we primarily want to study the role of HPV/HPyV in a large AdCC cohort and, secondly, possibly identify and characterize HMSC. Tumour DNA from 68 patients initially diagnosed with AdCC between 2000 and 2012 was, therefore, tested for 27 HPV types and 10 HPyVs. HPV DNA-positive samples were micromorphologically re-evaluated, further stained for p16INK4a, S100, p63 and CD117 and tested for the presence of the MYB-NFIB fusion transcript. Notably, no samples were HPyV-positive, while one sinonasal and two tonsillar carcinomas were HPV- and p16-positive. After re-evaluating the micromorphology, immunohistochemistry and presence of fusion transcripts, all tumours had the same appearance and fitted within the diagnosis of HMSC, but in all these three cases, the morphology of the HMSC and basaloid squamous cell carcinoma was overlapping. We conclude that HPV and HPyV have no major role in AdCC. However, based on our data, we also suggest that HMSC should be considered as a basaloid variant of squamous cell carcinoma, and not its own entity, until better characterized.

Background There is a lack of consensus concerning the definition of re-irradiation and re-irradiation volumes in head and neck cancer (HNC). The aim of the present study is to introduce a more strict definition of the re-irradiated volume that might better predict the risk of serious side-effects from treatment. Methods Fifty-four consecutive patients re-irradiated for HNC cancer were retrospectively analysed. CT images were deformably registered and the dose distributions accumulated after conversion to EQD2. Patients with a cumulative dose of ≥100 Gy in the overlapping volume (V100) were included in the study. Survival data and radiation-related acute and late toxicities were recorded. Results The overall survival of all included patients at 2 and 5 years was 42.6 and 27.3% respectively and the progression free survival at 2 and 5 years was 32.5 and 28.5% respectively. The overall rate of any event of severe (grade ≥ 3) acute and late toxicity was 26 and 51%, respectively. We found that severe acute toxicity was more common in patients who had a larger overlapping volume (V100 > mean) where 43% of the patients experienced grade ≥ 3 acute toxicity, compared to the patients with smaller overlapping volumes (V100 < mean) where only 11% had severe toxicity ( p  = 0.02). The seemingly high rates of late toxicity in the present study could be due to the use of a more strict definition of re-irradiation. In previous studies also patients with low dose overlap are included and our results imply that there is a risk that previous studies might have overestimated the risk-benefit ratio in re-irradiation of HNC. Conclusions Our study describes the outcome of a patient material where a more strict definition of the re-irradiated volume is used. With this definition, which could better describe the volume of highest risk for serious complications, we found that larger such overlapping volumes result in an increase in severe acute side-effects. A clear definition of re-irradiation and re-irradiation volumes is of utmost importance for future studies of HNC to make results from different studies comparable.

Abstract Chemotherapy-related encephalopathy is a rare but severe side effect of cancer therapy. Few reports exist on the course of encephalopathy due to 5-fluorouracil (5FU)/carboplatin treatment. Here, we report on a patient in his 70s, who received first-line palliative treatment with carboplatin followed by continuous infusion of 5FU against a metastasized cancer of the base of the tongue. During the first 5FU infusion, the patient developed a coma with sudden onset. In contrast to earlier reports of 5FU-induced encephalopathy, serum ammonium levels were near-normal, despite a slightly increased bilirubin. The electroencephalogram showed signs of general encephalopathy, for which no other probable cause than chemotherapy could be identified. Based on historical reports, the patient’s encephalopathy was likely due to 5FU treatment rather than carboplatin. While initially in a coma with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of three, the patient regained consciousness within 3 days of supportive therapy. This case highlights the potentially benign clinical course of 5FU-induced encephalopathy, characterized by fulminant clinical deterioration and quick recovery. Such a rapid deterioration in a palliative setting can pose a clinical dilemma, where invasive treatments such as intubation must be weighed against a limited prognosis, for which this case may provide guidance.

There are few effective treatment options for patients with recurrent or metastatic head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma. Pembrolizumab showed antitumour activity and manageable toxicity in early-phase trials. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab versus standard-of-care therapy for the treatment of head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma. We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study at 97 medical centres in 20 countries. Patients with head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma that progressed during or after platinum-containing treatment for recurrent or metastatic disease (or both), or whose disease recurred or progressed within 3–6 months of previous multimodal therapy containing platinum for locally advanced disease, were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of four per stratum with an interactive voice-response and integrated web-response system to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks intravenously or investigator's choice of standard doses of methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab intravenously (standard-of-care group). The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in the as-treated population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02252042, and is no longer enrolling patients. Between Dec 24, 2014, and May 13, 2016, 247 patients were randomly allocated to pembrolizumab and 248 were randomly allocated to standard of care. As of May 15, 2017, 181 (73%) of 247 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 207 (83%) of 248 patients in the standard-of-care group had died. Median overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was 8·4 months (95% CI 6·4–9·4) with pembrolizumab and 6·9 months (5·9–8·0) with standard of care (hazard ratio 0·80, 0·65–0·98; nominal p=0·0161). Fewer patients treated with pembrolizumab than with standard of care had grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events (33 [13%] of 246 vs 85 [36%] of 234). The most common treatment-related adverse event was hypothyroidism with pembrolizumab (in 33 [13%] patients) and fatigue with standard of care (in 43 [18%]). Treatment-related death occurred in four patients treated with pembrolizumab (unspecified cause, large intestine perforation, malignant neoplasm progression, and Stevens-Johnson syndrome) and two patients treated with standard of care (malignant neoplasm progression and pneumonia). The clinically meaningful prolongation of overall survival and favourable safety profile of pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma support the further evaluation of pembrolizumab as a monotherapy and as part of combination therapy in earlier stages of disease. Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co.

Adenoid cystic carcinoma (AdCC), a rare heterogenous disease, presents diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic challenges. To obtain more knowledge, we conducted a retrospective study on a cohort of 155 patients diagnosed in 2000–2022 with AdCC of the head and neck in Stockholm and investigated several clinical parameters in correlation to treatment and prognosis in the 142/155 patients treated with curative intent. The strongest favourable prognostic factors were early disease stage (stage I and II) as compared to late disease (stage III and IV) and major salivary gland subsite as compared to other subsites, with the best prognosis in the parotid gland, irrespective of the stage of the disease. Notably, in contrast to some studies, a significant correlation to survival was not found for perineural invasion or radical surgery. However, similar to others, we confirmed that other common prognostic factors, e.g., smoking, age, and gender, did not correlate to survival and should not be used for prognostication of AdCC of the head and neck. To conclude, in AdCC early disease stage, major salivary gland subsite and multimodal treatment were the strongest favourable prognostic factors, while this was not the case for age, gender and smoking nor perineural invasion and radical surgery.

Previous studies on dose-escalated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer have shown mixed results, and it is not established which patients would benefit from dose escalation. Further, while dose escalation does not appear to increase late toxicity, this needs to be confirmed with longer follow-up. In this study, we analysed treatment outcome and toxicity in 215 patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated with dose-escalated radiotherapy (>72 Gy, EQD2, α/β = 10 Gy, boost by brachytherapy or simultaneous integrated boost) and a matched cohort of 215 patients treated with standard dose external-beam radiotherapy (68 Gy) between 2011 and 2018 at our institution. The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 77.8% (72.4–83.6) and 73.7% (67.8–80.1) in the dose-escalated and standard dose group, respectively (p = 0.24). Median follow-up was 78.1 (49.2–98.4) and 60.2 (38.9–89.4) months in the dose-escalated and standard dose groups, respectively. Grade ≥3 osteoradionecrosis (ORN) and late dysphagia were more common in the dose-escalated group compared to the standard dose group, with 19 (8.8%) vs. 4 (1.9%) patients developing grade ≥3 ORN (p = 0.001), and 39 (18.1%) vs. 21 (9.8%) patients developing grade ≥3 dysphagia (p = 0.01). No predictive factors to help select patients for dose-escalated radiotherapy were found. However, the remarkably good OS in the dose-escalated cohort, despite a predominance of advanced tumour stages, encourages further attempts to identify such factors.