oropharyngeal cancer

Nivolumab Improved Survival For Patients With Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Source: www.aacr.org
Author: AACR Newsroom Staff
 

NEW ORLEANS — Treatment with the immunotherapeutic nivolumab (Opdivo) improved survival for patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma that progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy compared with single-agent chemotherapy of the investigator’s choice, according to results from the CheckMate-141 phase III clinical trial presented here at the AACR Annual Meeting 2016, April 16-20.Maura Gillison

“Recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma that is not responsive to platinum-based chemotherapy progresses very rapidly, and patients have a very poor prognosis,” said Maura L. Gillison, MD, PhD, a professor in the Department of Internal Medicine at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute. “Treatment usually involves single-agent chemotherapy. However, no therapy has been shown to improve survival for this patient population. New treatment options are desperately needed.

“This study is the first randomized clinical trial to clearly demonstrate improved overall survival for patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma,” continued Gillison. “We hope that the results will establish nivolumab as a new standard of care option for this patient population and thereby fulfill a huge unmet need.”

CheckMate-141 was a randomized, phase III clinical trial designed to determine whether the PD-1 inhibitor nivolumab could extend overall survival for patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma compared with treatment of the investigator’s choice, which was any of the commonly used therapeutics docetaxel, methotrexate, or cetuximab.

Of the 361 patients enrolled in the clinical trial, 240 were randomly assigned to nivolumab and 121 to single-agent chemotherapy of investigator’s choice.

At the interim analysis, which was conducted after 218 events, patients assigned to nivolumab were found to have a 30 percent reduction in risk of death compared with those assigned therapy of investigator’s choice. Median overall survival was 7.5 months for those assigned nivolumab versus 5.1 months for those assigned therapy of investigator’s choice. At 12 months, 36 percent of the patients treated with nivolumab were alive compared with 17 percent of those assigned therapy of investigator’s choice.

Because certain types of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, particularly those arising in the oropharynx (back of the throat, including the base of the tongue and tonsils), have been linked with human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, the investigators also evaluated the data based on the HPV status of the patients’ tumors.

The effect of nivolumab on overall survival was seen for both patients with HPV-positive disease and those with HPV-negative disease. Among patients with HPV-positive disease, median overall survival was 9.1 months for those assigned nivolumab versus 4.4 months for those assigned therapy of investigator’s choice, and among patients with HPV-negative disease, median overall survival was 7.5 months for those assigned nivolumab versus 5.8 months for those assigned therapy of investigator’s choice.

A survival benefit in patients treated with nivolumab was observed for the overall study population. Exploratory analysis suggested that the benefit was greater for patients treated with nivolumab whose tumors had PD-L1 expression (of 1 percent or greater) or were HPV-positive.

“Overall, our data are extremely exciting. This clinical trial has established head and neck squamous cell carcinoma as responsive to immunotherapy. We are hopeful that this represents the tip of the iceberg with regard to future benefit of immunotherapy for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma,” added Gillison.

This study was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Gillison’s role in the study was funded in part by the Oral Cancer Foundation. Gillison has consulted for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, and Merck in the past year.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

 

The Oral Cancer Foundation’s Founder, Brian R. Hill, honored by the Global Oral Cancer Forum – International oral cancer community honor his accomplishments in the field.

Source: www.prnewswire.com
Author: The Oral Cancer Foundation
 

Bryan R. Hill receiving the award at the Global Oral Cancer Forum. (PRNewsFoto/Oral Cancer Foundation)

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., March 10, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — At the recent Global Oral Cancer Forum (GOCF), Brian R. Hill, Executive Director and Founder of the Oral Cancer Foundation (OCF), was honored for his work as an advocate and innovative thinker in the oral cancer arena. The GOCF organizers and community awarded Hill the 2016 Global Oral Cancer Forum Commitment, Courage and Innovation Leadership Award for his dedication and contributions to the field of oral cancer over the last 18 years. Upon accepting the award, Hill received a standing ovation from those in attendance, which included global oral cancer thought leaders, researchers, treatment physicians, other non-profit organizations and representatives from various government agencies, including the National Institutes of Health / National Cancer Institute, and the World Health Organization (WHO).

When asked about being honored Hill said, “In the beginning and for many years I was alone at OCF and it was just the seed of an idea. Those grassroots efforts matured into a robust network of important relationships with a common goal. Today OCF is so much more than just me and my singular efforts. Through the benevolence of the many OCF supporters, particularly in the RDH, dental/medical professional communities and survivor groups, OCF has grown into a powerful national force for proactive change of the late discovery paradigm, access to quality information, disease and patient advocacy, funding of research, and patient support.” Hill acknowledges that he had the mentorship of some of the brightest minds of the non-profit world to build his understanding of appropriate governorship of an entity such as OCF, as well as support from core researchers and treatment professionals in the oral cancer arena. “To paraphrase someone far more famous, if I was able to see farther than others had going before me, it was because I stood on the shoulders of many highly accomplished others who helped me achieve my goals,” says Hill.

Hill, a stage four oral cancer survivor, became a student of the disease after his own diagnosis left him looking for answers. Since founding OCF and overseeing the path and initiatives of the foundation for more than a decade and a half, Hill often finds the advocacy role suits him well. He has championed anti-tobacco legislation within the political system, and is an advocate at various government entities such as the CDC regarding vaccination of boys against the virus known to be the primary cause of most oropharyngeal cancers.  He also sits on two National Institutes of Health (NIH) oversight committees—one at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), which oversees clinical trials in immunotherapies in head and neck cancers, the other at the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) reviewing trials looking at long-term outcomes and complications of treatment in head and neck cancers. In addition, Hill still one-on-one counsels patients, participates in OCF’s online Patient Support Forum, and is often the voice for a community that has lost its own, through many diverse media interviews and lectures.

While OCF has received many awards for its advocacy work and contributions to the battle against oral cancer, including recognition from the NIH/NIDCR, WHO, Great Non-Profits, various universities and professional medical and dental societies, and even Internet guru Mashable.com for innovations in applying technology to serve its health oriented goals, receiving recognition from this forums organizers and some of the  leading authorities on oral cancer in the international community is particularly meaningful. Those in attendance are recognized as experts in the field and understand the challenges and importance of the work OCF has undertaken. Sponsored by the Henry Schein Cares Foundation, the benevolent arm of the powerful Henry Schein Inc., known for its long-term commitment to improve issues related to oral care, The Global Oral Cancer Forum’s vision is to build partnerships that will promote the changes required for a substantial impact on the incidence, morbidity, and mortality of oral cancer worldwide. The importance of the Schein organization’s leadership in creating this venue cannot be overstated.

Top oral cancer experts and advocates from around the world, representing countries as far away as Japan, China, and India as well as from the Americas, convened over the weekend to attend the inaugural forum. Attendees included clinicians, scientists, epidemiologists, activists, public health experts, as well as OCF Directors and other NPO organization heads who are working hard to find impactful avenues to reduce the global oral cancer burden. Attendees met to exchange ideas and learn from one another about what is and isn’t working in the global realm of this disease. Delegates from thirty-three countries presented new research findings and discussed their unique challenges and approaches to understanding and addressing one of the leading burdens of the cancer world.

Globally, the incidence rate for oral cancer is growing and has reached what many experts are calling epidemic proportions. This year approximately half a million patients will be newly diagnosed with an oral or oropharyngeal cancer. Among the topics discussed by GOCF panelists were the rise in disease incidence and the regional disparities and factors affecting global populations. Communities throughout much of South East Asia report a high percentage of the population chewing betel and areca nut, a significant risk factor for the development of oral cancer. Meanwhile in the U.S. and other developed countries the prevalence of the HPV virus is the leading contributor to the rising rates of oropharyngeal cancers. Identifying these differences is vital to the development of effective prevention, public policy, and treatment strategies. Advancement of a universal understanding of what the problems are and what initiatives are working around the globe, reveals commonalities, and within them the group will find its beginning joint efforts to effect change.

Looking forward there is clearly much work to be done. The good news is that there are significant strides being made in research and treatment; but balancing those positives, there are also significant shortcomings in current governmental policies, prevention, and public awareness and understanding. Hill said, “While I and OCF are very proud to have been chosen by the organizers, and the global oral cancer community to receive this award, it only serves to motivate us to strive to accomplish more. We have built relationships here that will translate into new avenues of endeavor for OCF in the future.” Jamie O’Day, OCF’s Director of Operations, also attended the conference and spent her time networking with her counterparts from around the world. Many new ideas were garnered from these discussions that will be applied in future OCF initiatives and support OCF’s mission to reduce the suffering caused by this disease both nationally and globally.

About the Oral Cancer Foundation:
The Oral Cancer Foundation, founded by oral cancer survivor Brian R. Hill, is an IRS registered non-profit 501(c)(3) public service charity that provides vetted information, patient support, sponsorship of research, as well as disease and risk factor reduction advocacy related to oral cancer. Oral cancer is the largest group of those cancers that fall into the head and neck cancer category. Common names for it include such things as mouth cancer, tongue cancer, tonsil cancer, head and neck cancer, and throat cancer. The Oral Cancer Foundation maintains the websites: www.oralcancer.org , www.oralcancernews.org , www.oralcancersupport.org , which receive millions of hits per month. Supporting the foundation’s goals is a scientific advisory board composed of leading cancer authorities from varied medical and dental specialties, and from prominent educational, treatment, and research institutions in the United States. The foundation also manages the Bruce Paltrow Oral Cancer Fund, a collaboration between the Paltrow family represented by Ms. Blythe Danner (Paltrow), Gwyneth Paltrow, Jake Paltrow and the Oral Cancer Foundation.

Media Contact: Jamie O’Day / The Oral Cancer Foundation (949) 723-4400 jamie@oralcancerfoundation.org

Immunotherapy Continues to Advance in Head and Neck Cancer

Source: www.onclive.com
Author: Megan Garlapow, PhD
 

Concomitant administration of motolimod with cetuximab (Erbitux) increases the innate and adaptive immune response in the blood and the tumor microenvironment in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), overcoming negative prognostic biomarkers of cetuximab therapy alone, according to the biomarker data from a recent phase Ib clinical trial that was presented at the 2016 Head and Neck Cancer Symposium. The trial was recently amended to add nivolumab to the combination of cetuximab and motolimod.

Robert-FerrisDr. Robert Ferris, MD PhD

 

“We know that PD-1 and PD-L1 are overexpressed in head and neck cancer, and so it was somewhat irresistible to combine our baseline treatment of cetuximab and motolimod with the PD-L1 inhibition pathway. EGFR itself drives PD-L1, so combining cetuximab with anti-PD-1 inhibitor makes sense. So, we’ve amended this trial. We’re now accruing to treatment with cetuximab, motolimod, and the anti–PD-L1 nivolumab in this trial,” said lead author Robert Ferris, MD, PhD, professor, Departments of Otolaryngology, Radiation Oncology, and Immunology, Cancer Immunology Program, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

According to the authors of the phase Ib data presented at the symposium, the rationale for combining cetuximab with motolimod (VTX2337) as neoadjuvant therapy was that cetuximab induces cellular immunity that correlates with neoadjuvant clinical response. The phase I dose-escalation and safety of the combination had been established (NCT 01334177).

This study of neoadjuvant cetuximab and motolimod had accrued 14 patients with HNSCC that was stage II-IV, resectable, and located in the oropharynx, oral cavity, hypopharynx, or larynx. These patients were biopsied, treated with cetuximab and motolimod for 4 weeks, and then underwent surgery. The endpoints of the trial were the modulation of immune biomarkers.

Interferon-inducible cytokine IP-10 increased after the patients were administered neoadjuvant cetuximab and motolimod (P = .0001). After the neoadjuvant treatment, the peripheral blood lymphocytes had an increased frequency of EGFR-specific CD8 T cells. After the neoadjuvant treatment, regulatory T cells had decreased suppressive receptors and transforming growth factor-β, which induces Foxp3. Also, after the neoadjuvant treatment, circulating MDSCs had decreased PD-L1 (P <.07) and macrophages had increased CD16 expression (P <.07).

After the neoadjuvant treatment with cetuximab and motolimod, genotyping of T-cell receptors showed increased clonality in peripheral blood lymphocytes (P = .003 by Wilcox signed rank test) and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (P = .081 by Wilcox signed rank test). Most patients are more oligoclonal than healthy individuals, and some are very clonal with highly prominent expanded clones. Genotyping of T-cell receptors found that clonality was increased by the combination of cetuximab and motolimod compared with treatment with cetuximab alone.

Recent studies have indicated that the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is upregulated in the HNSCC microenvironment, and that EGFR blockade prevents interferon-γ-mediated upregulation of PD-L1. Thus, this study has been amended to add nivolumab to the adjuvant treatment with cetuximab and motolimod. The endpoints are still the modulation of immune biomarkers.

The aim is to target the tumor microenvironment, such that tumor immune escape is reversed and T cells eliminate HNSCC. Antitumor T cells are reprogrammed to reverse inhibitory signals. Combining the toll-like receptor agonist, motolimod, with cetuximab and with PD-1 pathway inhibitors, such as nivolumab, may enhance the priming and activity of T cells.

“Targeting the tumor microenvironment requires understanding as well as reversal of immune escape mechanisms in the cellular compartment. Reprogramming antitumor T cells to reverse inhibitory signals can be done by directly disrupting those inhibitory signals, the so-called checkpoint receptor field, and can be done potentially by combining proinflammatory signals, such as toll-like receptor agonists, to chemo-attract cells into the microenvironment and to create good inflammation to overcome suppressive factors,” said Ferris.

Recent findings have shown tremendous promise for nivolumab in head and neck cancer. Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) announced in January 2016 that nivolumab improved overall survival versus investigator’s choice of therapy for patients with platinum-refractory squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in the phase III CheckMate-141 trial. Findings from the study are being discussed with the FDA and other health authorities, according to BMS.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.
February, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

NCCN Is ‘Vague,’ So Study Clarifies H&N Cancer Follow-up

Source: www.medscape.com
Author: Nick Mulcahy
 

Clinical guidelines can sometimes be slow to respond to epidemiology.

Take the case of oropharyngeal cancers that are associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. They are increasingly common in the United States and, as several studies have demonstrated, have better survival than cancers of this type that are not HPV-positive.

Nonetheless, one of the beacons in oncology care, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), recommends the same follow-up care guidance for oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma whether it is associated with HPV or not, according to two experts.

For post-treatment follow-up, including recurrence detection, “the NCCN guidelines are one-size-fits-all,” said Jessica Frakes, MD, a radiation oncologist at the Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute in Tampa, Florida.

She spoke during a press briefing at the Multidisciplinary Head and Neck Cancer Symposium 2016 in Scottsdale, Arizona.

“You are exactly right: the NCCN is fairly vague about when to perform imaging,” said Christine Gourin, MD, an otolaryngologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, who moderated the press briefing.

Dr Frakes and her colleagues have stepped into this informational breach with a new study that might help clinicians gain clarity on the use of surveillance imaging in HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer and reduce its frequency.

“The purpose of our study is to determine when these patients fail and when they have side effects so we know how to guide optimal follow-up,” Dr Frakes explained.

The study authors examined 246 cases of nonmetastatic HPV-positive oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma treated with radiation therapy at Moffitt from 2006 to 2014. Most patients (84.6%) received radiation therapy and a concurrent systemic therapy; a minority (15.4%) received radiation alone. Most patients had locally advanced disease.

The team’s major finding was that the great majority of recurrences and toxicities can be detected with imaging 3 months after treatment with definitive radiation therapy and physical exams during the 6 months after treatment.

Specifically, all six local failures were detected by sight or with flexible laryngoscopy conducted during physical exams in that 6-month period.

Eight of the nine regional recurrences (89%), 12 of the 13 locoregional failures (92%), and 15 of the 21 distant recurrences (71%) were detected from symptoms or with a PET/CT scan 3 months after treatment

“For most patients with HPV-associated oropharynx cancer, after a negative 3-month PET scan, physical exams with history and direct visualization are sufficient to find recurrences,” said Dr Frakes in a press statement.

The findings — and the suggestion that PET scans can be suspended after 3 months — are akin to what happens in clinical practice at Johns Hopkins, Dr Gourin reported.

“We have stopped routinely imaging patients after 3 months if a PET is negative, and it’s true that we do pick up more recurrences clinically than radiologically,” she said.

Cutting down on PET scans in this patient population is a good thing, suggested Dr Gourin. “I think we probably do too much post-treatment surveillance imaging,” she said.

There are multiple benefits to suspending imaging, including potentially lowering patient stress because they know their recurrence risk is low and don’t have anxiety related to test results.

Plus, there is a cost reduction.

“A PET scan costs $1500 [for the patient],” said Dr Frakes. Dr Gourin noted that the test is even more expensive in her geographic region.

Factors That Increase Recurrence Risk

The study authors also identified disease characteristics that increase the likelihood of recurrence.

Both regional and distant failures were more common in patients who presented with five or more positive lymph nodes or who had level IV lymph nodes (P < .05).

And the risk of developing distant metastases was greater in patients with a lymph node larger than 6 cm or with bilateral lymphadenopathy (P < .05).

But overall, the results are “excellent,” said Dr Frakes. Within 3 years, the rate of local control was 97.8%, of regional control was 95.3%, of locoregional control was 94.0%, and of freedom from distant metastases was 91.4%. The rate of 3-year overall survival was 91.0%.

Toxicities were also low, which is an endorsement of the multidisciplinary care, said Dr Frakes.

Only 9% of patients experienced severe late toxicities, including 19 grade 3 toxicities and two grade 4 toxicities. These were resolved in 16 of 21 toxicities (76%) at the time of last follow-up.

Most of the toxicities and/or recurrences (64%) occurred in the first 6 months after treatment; only four events occurred more than 2 years after treatment.

Dr Gourin questioned the low rate of serious late toxicities seen with this nonsurgical management of patients. Such a low rate “has not been our experience” at Johns Hopkins, she said.

Dr Frakes and Dr Gourin have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Multidisciplinary Head and Neck Cancer Symposium (MHNCS) 2016: Abstract 6. Presented February 19, 2016.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

February, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Excitement at new cancer treatment

Source: www.news.doximity.com
Author: James Gallagher
_88291939_c0151810-acute_lymphoblastic_leukaemia,_micrograph-splA therapy that retrains the body’s immune system to fight cancer has provoked excitement after more than 90% of terminally ill patients reportedly went into remission.

 

White blood cells were taken from patients with leukaemia, modified in the lab and then put back.

But the data has not been published or reviewed and two patients are said to have died from an extreme immune response.

Experts said the trial was exciting, but still only “a baby step.”

The news bubbled out of the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s annual meeting in Washington DC.

The lead scientist, Prof Stanley Riddell from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Centre in Seattle, said all other treatments had failed in these patients and they had only two-to-five months to live.

He told the conference that: “The early data is unprecedented.”

Re-training

In the trial, cells from the immune system called killer t-cells were taken out of dozens of patients. The cells normally act like bombs destroying infected tissue.

The researchers genetically modified the t-cells to engineer a new targeting mechanism – with the technical name of chimeric antigen receptors – to target acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.

Prof Riddell told the BBC: “Essentially what this process does is, it genetically reprograms the T-cell to seek out and recognise and destroy the patient’s tumour cells.

“[The patients] were really at the end of the line in terms of treatment options and yet a single dose of this therapy put more than ninety percent of these patients in complete remission where we can’t detect any of these leukaemia cells.”

But one cancer expert told me they still felt in the dark on the full significance of the study, as the data is not available.

Also seven of the patients developed cytokine release syndrome so severe that they required intensive care, and a further two patients died.

While those odds may be acceptable if facing terminal cancer, the side-effects are much greater than conventional leukaemia treatments such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy, which work in the majority of patients.


Analysis

By James Gallagher, health editor, BBC News website

The field of immunotherapy – harnessing the immune system to attack cancer – is coming of age.

The significance of today’s development is hard to ascertain while the data is unpublished – but the field is undoubtedly making giant strides.

Drugs called checkpoint inhibitors, such as pembrolizumab and ipilimumab, take the brakes off the immune system so it attacks cancer.

They are already being used by doctors.

And other experimental techniques are coming to fruition to allow doctors to change a patient’s own cells to engineer a designer immune system to kill cancer.

It’s an exciting time that is likely to see immunotherapy soon join chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery as major weapons in the fight against cancer.


There is also a big difference between using such approaches on a blood cancer like leukaemia and “solid” tumours such as breast cancer.

Dr Alan Worsley, from Cancer Research UK, said that while the field was incredibly exciting, “this is a baby step”.

He told the BBC: “We’ve been working for a while using this type of technology, genetically engineering cells. So far it’s really shown some promise in this type of blood cancer.

“We should say that in most cases standard treatment for blood cancer is quite effective, so this is for those rare patients where that hasn’t worked.

“The real challenge now is how do we get this to work for other cancers, how do we get it to work for what’s known as solid cancers, cancers in the tissue?”

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

**Note: While OCF has included this general media news report in our oral cancer news feed, we wish our readers to note the many caveats in it. A few patents had extreme reactions to the immuno therapy, including death. And the data has not been published, so outside of the group that conducted this research, there have been no professional commentaries on the trial, which perhaps might offer counterpoints. Also, for us in the oral and oropharyngeal  world of solid tumors we have no idea if this could work. Certainly these patients with only months to live, thought like I would. Why not try, I might win the lottery (as some certainly did) and if it doesn’t work, I have in my demise provided scientific insight that might help others behind me on this path.  But even in that group we do not yet know if these remissions will be robust and durable over a long period of time, or if there are to be in the coming years some new catastrophic issue related to the treatment. This is indeed an exciting time in cancer research. But as OCF continues to put stories and actual clinical data about these approaches up in our news stream, please remember that we are in the infancy of our knowledge and understanding of all this. These are not currently first line treatment ideas, many will be in the realm of clinical trial settings for years, and not available to most. While I am very fortunate to sit on the National Cancer Institute Oversight Committee on Immunotherapeutics  in Head and Neck Cancers, I was reminded the other day by a colleague trying to keep my expectations in perspective. He said – remember the charts that were available to Columbus when he set sail for the new world.  Out in the middle of the ocean there was a notation that said “Beyond here there be sea monsters…… as many ships had set to sea and many were never heard from again. And we are finding ourselves in slightly similar circumstances. Chimera antigens, and much more are giving us a glimpse of what MAY be just over the horizon.  Fortunately, I said….he landed safely on a new land, and the world that was known was changed forever.  These are indeed exciting times of great promise, but there is hard work to do still on the table.  OCF and its donor supported researchers are on the cutting edge of the current thoughts, and all of us together will hopefully find ourselves standing on that distant shore, and the world we know today will be forever changed.  Brian Hill

February, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

HPV vaccination rates are low, especially in Kansas and Missouri, and cancer experts are alarmed

Source: www.kansascity.com
Author: Lisa Gutierrez
HPV (2)The HPV vaccine is recommended for girls and boys starting at ages 11 to 12. But in state-by-state comparisons, children in Kansas and Missouri rank at or near the bottom of the list. John Amis The Associated Press

 

The University of Kansas Cancer Center recently joined nearly 70 other cancer centers across the country to sound an alarm about the HPV vaccine.

Many children still are not getting the recommended vaccine for human papillomavirus, which causes head and neck cancer in men and women, cervical cancer in women and a host of other cancers in both.

In Kansas and Missouri, less than 49 percent of girls have received the vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Kansas ranks dead last in the nation, and Missouri is near the bottom. Both states rank low for the number of boys who are vaccinated too.

The public call from KU’s cancer center was blunt: The vaccine prevents cancer. What’s the problem?

“It absolutely breaks my heart,” said Terry Tsue, physician-in-chief at the University of Kansas Cancer Center. “We have two vaccines against cancers that are caused by virus, the hepatitis A vaccine and the HPV vaccine. Otherwise, we don’t have a vaccine that prevents cancer.

“There are thousands and thousands of people dying annually from this disease that could have been prevented had we had this vaccine 30 years ago. We didn’t have it and were so slow in adopting it that for the next 30 years we’re going to lose the same number of people, and more, because it’s spreading.”

The nation’s cancer centers banding together to issue a collective statement was a rare move for those involved in cancer research and prevention.

The low HPV vaccination numbers represent a public health threat, said cancer center officials, who asked health care providers and parents to take advantage of the vaccine.

Considering President Barack Obama’s new “moonshot” efforts to cure cancer, “this is one example of actions that can be taken today to make a very big difference in the future cancer burden,” said a statement from Ernest Hawk, vice president and division head of cancer prevention and population sciences at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Tsue is stunned by what people don’t know about HPV. For instance, about 70 percent of parents apparently don’t know that the vaccine is recommended for boys as well as girls.

The vaccine not only prevents “female” cancers — cervical, vaginal, vulvar — but it also prevents cancer in the throat, known as oropharyngeal cancers. And three times as many men as women get throat cancer from HPV, says Tsue.

Twenty percent of patients with HPV-related throat cancers die within five years.

“Our practitioners aren’t aware of the magnitude and this kind of tsunami of cases,” said Tsue, a head and neck surgeon. “Throat cancer related to HPV is growing up to 5 percent a year. No other cancer is growing like that. And it will surpass cervical cancer caused by HPV by 2020.”

According to the CDC, HPV infections are responsible for about 27,000 new cancer diagnoses each year in the U.S.

So the CDC recommends that all boys and girls get a three-dose round of HPV vaccine shots at the ages of 11 or 12. The vaccine can be up to 93 percent effective when it’s given at that optimal time, CDC officials say.

But vaccination rates are low. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services set a goal to have 80 percent of American girls ages 13 to 15 fully vaccinated by the year 2020. But four out of 10 girls remain unvaccinated, according to CDC statistics, and fewer than six out of 10 boys have been vaccinated.

Tsue says that health professionals are battling a lot of misinformation and misconception among the public. Surveys of parents, for instance, show that many mistakenly think HPV has something to do with HIV.

Tsue thinks another issue is that parents equate the vaccine with sex because the virus is most commonly sexually transmitted, though it can sometimes be transmitted without sexual contact.

Parents tells survey takers that their children don’t need the vaccine because their kids aren’t having sex.

However, most men and women in the United States will be infected with at least one type of HPV at some time in their lives.

“Eighty percent of adults get HPV in their lives — 80,” said Tsue. “So this isn’t for the hooker on the corner of the red light district. This is 80 percent of the U.S. population will have HPV sometime in their life.”

Tsue thinks that some parents also believe that having their children vaccinated will somehow give them free rein to have sex or will promote promiscuity, though studies have shown that getting the vaccine doesn’t make kids more likely to have sex at a younger age.

“So your 10-year-old who has no idea what the shot they’re getting is will subsequently go out and have sex the next week because they got a shot that prevents the HPV virus?” said Tsue. “That’s (what) we’re dealing with.”

Though the vaccine is not known to cause serious or long-term side effects, questions about its safety linger for some parents, particularly those who have sworn off childhood vaccines. Five years ago, then-congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota charged during a presidential debate that the vaccine was “very dangerous” and caused “mental retardation.”

A study published in Pediatrics in 2013 showed that among the most frequent reasons parents gave for not having their children vaccinated was fear of the vaccine’s safety.

The website VacTruth.com — run by a father who says his son was harmed by childhood vaccinations — published a story last month charging that reports of serious side effects and deaths linked to HPV vaccines are being kept secret from the public.

Thousands of young girls, the story claims, “have fallen seriously ill, have had their health completely ruined after these vaccines and many have died.”

It cited records from the website Judicial Watch, which describes itself as “a conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation,” claiming that one of the HPV vaccines, Gardasil, is linked to “thousands of serious adverse reactions and debilitating side effects, including seizures, blindness, paralysis and dozens of deaths.”

Judicial Watch, which has been investigating the vaccine for the last few years, has dubbed the HPV vaccine “a large-scale public health experiment.”

The medical community considers the vaccine one of the safest around.

“All this bad press about vaccines, how it kills people, how it causes autism, all false,” said Tsue.

Tsue talks to small groups of health care professionals about HPV-related cancers on his quest to promote the vaccine. He believes that more pediatricians and family practitioners should start talking to parents about it too.

“We need to help providers to make a strong cancer prevention recommendation for vaccinating 11- and 12-year-old boys and girls with the HPV vaccine,” Anna Giuliano, director of the Center for Infection Research in Cancer at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla., told NPR earlier this month.

“If all the pediatricians and family practice doctors were making that strong recommendation, I think we would see a strong increase in the rate of uptake in that vaccine.”

Tsue and other cancer experts would like to see the HPV vaccine added to the lineup of regularly scheduled vaccines schoolchildren already receive: tetanus, diphtheria, whooping cough and meningitis, among them.

Tsue supports mandatory vaccination too — neither Kansas nor Missouri mandates the vaccine — but that’s been a hard sell already.

In 2011, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas had to reverse his decision to make the vaccine mandatory when conservative parents in his state revolted.

The Rhode Island General Assembly faced the same objections last year after it required the vaccine for all seventh-graders. The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity held a rally protesting the mandate on the vaccine with parents who said their children got sick from it.

Parents also argue that they should be allowed to make the vaccination decision themselves, a point that the American Civil Liberties Union supports Rhode Island parents on.

Meanwhile, public health officials in Massachusetts itching to do something to raise the rate of HPV vaccinations there are watching Rhode Island’s success with the mandate, according to The Boston Globe.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

February, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

HPV16 Antibodies Signal Even Better Oral Cancer Outcomes

Source: www.medscape.com
Author: Neil Osterweil
 

Another prognostic tool may be in the offing for clinicians to use in evaluating patients with oropharyngeal cancers, new research suggests.

The presence in serum of three antibodies to human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16) was predictive of better progression-free and overall survival in these patients, according to Kristina R. Dahlstrom, PhD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, in Houston, and colleagues.

Patients whose serum was positive for the presence of three specific antibodies to “early” (E) proteins involved in replication and growth of HPV16 had dramatically better rates of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with patients whose serum was negative for the antibodies, they reported online June 15 in Clinical Cancer Research.

Specifically, for those patients whose serum was positive for any E antibodies, 5-year estimated OS was 87.4%, compared with 42.2% for patients whose sereum was negative for all E antibodies (P < .001). The respective 5-year PFS rates were 82.9% and 46.1% (P < .001).

“These results hint at a prognostic stratification of patients with HPV-related oropharynx cancer reflecting humoral immune response to HPV type 16 E proteins and thus may help in choosing immunotherapy approaches for such patients in future,” said senior author Erich M. Sturgis, MD, MPH, a surgeon at MD Anderson, in comments to Medscape Medical News.

Currently, the serology results are not strong enough to be used as clinical decision tools for choosing current therapies, she added.

Their findings also suggest that vaccine-based immunotherapy targeted against HPV16 E-antigens combined with other immunotherapies such as checkpoint inhibitors might be effective against recurrent or metastatic HPV16-positive cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx, said Dr Sturgis.

The findings appear to further illuminate what is going on immunologically in these patients, said an expert not involved with the research.

“This is certainly an interesting study that builds upon our early understanding of the role of the host’s immune response in determining outcomes in HPV-associated oropharynx cancers,” commented Lori J Wirth, MD, a head and neck cancer specialist at the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, in Boston.

“We know from responses experienced by HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients enrolled in early clinical trials investigating checkpoint inhibitors that the host immune system can be exploited for a therapeutic end. The more we know about the host immune response to this virally mediated cancer, the better we’ll get at taking advantage of it,” she told Medscape Medical News.

More Cancers, Better Outcomes

Earlier studies have shown that although the incidence of HPV-related head and neck cancers is rising, patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas positive for HPV16 have significantly better prognoses than patients with the same cancers not related to HPV infections.

To see whether they could identify prognostic biomarkers in patients with HPV-related oropharyngeal cancers, the investigators used enzyme-linked immunosorbent assasy to quantify immunoglobulin G antibodies to both early antigens (E1 and E4-E7) to the viral capsid proteins L1 and L2, and to the N-terminal and C-terminal fragments of E2 (NE2, CE2).

Among serum samples taken from 209 patients with oropharyngeal cancers at diagnosis, at the end of treatment, and during follow-up, PFS was significantly better for patients testing positive for any E antigen (P < .001), but not for patients testing positive for any L antigen. Therefore, for all subsequent analyses, the investigators focused only on patients testing positive for E antigens.

In multivariable models adjusted for age, smoking status, and treatment, the hazard ratio (HR) for death for patients with any E antibodies was 0.20 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1 – 0.4).

The HR for progression for those with any E antibodies was 0.20; (95% CI, 0.1 – 0.5).

The investigators also found that serum positivity for NE2, E1, and E6 were were all strongly associated with better OS and PFS, with respective HRs of 0.20, 0.30, and 0.30 (all significant, as shown by 95% CI).

“Specific antibody status has the potential to be a useful prognostic indicator that may identify subsets of patients diagnosed with HPV16-positive tumors who may benefit from altered monitoring and/or treatments. In addition, the suggestion that immune response to HPV16 antigens is important to cancer outcomes suggests the potential of augmenting immune responses to improve treatment of patients with HPV-driven oropharyngeal carcinoma,” the investigators write.

The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Dr Sturgis and Dr Wirth have reported no relevant financial relationships.

Clin Cancer Res. 2015:21:2861-2869. Abstract

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

NIH-funded study finds new potential drug targets by uncovering a range of molecular alterations in head and neck cancers

Source: www.nih.gov
Author: Staff
 

Investigators with The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Research Network have discovered genomic differences — with potentially important clinical implications — in head and neck cancers caused by infection with the human papillomavirus (HPV). HPV is the most common sexually transmitted virus in the United States, and the number of HPV-related head and neck cancers has been growing. Almost every sexually active person will acquire HPV at some point in their lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The researchers also uncovered new smoking-related cancer subtypes and potential new drug targets, and found numerous genomic similarities with other cancer types. Taken together, this study’s findings may provide more detailed explanations of how HPV infection and smoking play roles in head and neck cancer risk and disease development, and offer potential novel diagnostic and treatment directions.

The study is the most comprehensive examination to date of genomic alterations in head and neck cancers. The results were published online Jan. 28, 2015 in the journal Nature. TCGA is jointly supported and managed by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), both parts of the National Institutes of Health.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved HPV vaccines should be able to prevent the cancers caused by HPV infection in head and neck cancers and elsewhere, including anal cancer, whose incidence has also been increasing. However, these vaccines work by preventing new infections, and the long interval between infection and cancer development make it important to understand the molecular changes that bring about these HPV-positive head and neck cancers — as well as those that lead to the HPV-negative cancers — and to develop new approaches for treating them.

“The rapid increase in HPV-related head and neck cancers, noticeably in oropharyngeal tumors, has created an even greater sense of urgency in the field,” said D. Neil Hayes, M.D., M.P.H, senior author of the study report and associate professor of medicine at the University of North Carolina (UNC) and the UNC Lineberger Cancer Center at Chapel Hill. Oropharyngeal cancer starts in the oropharynx, which is the part of the throat just behind the mouth. “We’re uncovering differences between tumors with and without HPV infection, and these new data are allowing us to rethink how we approach head and neck cancers.”

In the study, researchers performed genomic analyses on 279 tumors – head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) – from untreated patients. Approximately 80 percent of tumor samples were from individuals who smoked. The majority of samples were oral cavity cancers (61 percent) and larynx cancers (26 percent).

While only about 25 percent of head and neck cancers are linked to HPV infection, TCGA researchers confirmed that many patients with HPV-associated tumors have specific alterations of the gene FGFR3 and mutations in the PIK3CA gene, which are also found in a much broader set of mutations in smoking-related tumors. In contrast, while the EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) gene is frequently altered in HPV-negative tumors in smokers, it is rarely abnormal in HPV-positive tumors. Such insights may help in developing potential therapies and biomarkers, noted Dr. Hayes.

Head and neck cancers comprise a constellation of tumors of the mouth, throat, larynx, nasal cavity, salivary gland and elsewhere that have frequently been attributed to tobacco and alcohol use in most patients. Some 90 percent are squamous cell carcinomas, which occur in the surface layers of cells in the body. An estimated 55,000 people developed head and neck cancer in the United States in 2014. Approximately 12,000 Americans die from the diseases each year. Head and neck cancers are common worldwide, with more than 600,000 cases diagnosed each year.

“The rising worldwide incidence of head and neck cancers makes these types of large integrated genomic analyses by TCGA vital to establish a more detailed understanding of disease causes and behavior, and for the development of new treatment approaches,” said NIH Director Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D.

Scientists found that more than 70 percent of head and neck cancers had alterations in genes for growth factor receptors (EGFR, FGFR, IGFR, MET, ERBB2, DDR2), signaling molecules (PIK3CA, HRAS) and cell division regulation (CCND1). These genes may play roles in pathways that control cell growth and proliferation, and for which therapies are either available or in development.

The investigators also discovered new clues about drug resistance in head and neck cancers. They found that genes affecting about 40 percent of such cancers form key parts of a pathway that helps determine cell survival and drug resistance. They showed that extra copies of the genes FADD and BIRC2, or mutations in or the absence of the CASP8gene in smoking-related cancers — all which affect the process of programmed cell death — may underlie the resistance of cancer cells to current treatments. Similarly, the absence of the TRAF3 gene, or extra copies of a gene for the growth-promoting E2F1 protein in HPV-related cancers, may also increase resistance.

The findings showed similarities between head and neck cancer genomes and other cancers, including squamous cell lung and cervical, indicating possible common paths of cancer development, and potential treatment opportunities. “It is surprising to see that head and neck tumor genomes are remarkably similar to cervical and squamous lung cancer genomes. They are from very different organs, but they show similar losses and gains of genetic material across tumors,” Dr. Hayes noted. These common genetic abnormalities belong to a pathway that protects cells from damage and stress.

“These novel findings help establish a genomic map of various head and neck cancers, provide new insights into other similar cancers and may further our understanding of how viruses can impact disease,” said NHGRI Director Eric D. Green, M.D., Ph.D.

“While many head and neck cancers are preventable, they are increasingly common throughout the world, and often challenging to effectively treat over the long term,” said NCI Director Harold Varmus, M.D. “This type of broad analysis provides important new clues for future research and treatment directions.”

The TCGA Research Network has generated data and published analyses on a number of cancers, all of which can be found on the TCGA website, http://www.cancergenome.nih.gov.

TCGA-generated data are freely available at the TCGA Data Portal and CGHub.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.
March, 2015|Oral Cancer News|

HPV Related Cancers Increase in Men

Source: scientificamerican.com
Author: Robin Lloyd

A vaccine to protect against the most dangerous strains of human papillomavirus (HPV), which cause almost all cervical cancers, as well as many cases of other cancers and genital warts in both sexes, won the approval of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration nearly nine years ago. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now recommends that all boys and girls aged 11 or 12 receive the shots. Vaccination campaigns, aimed largely at girls and women, have fallen short of expectations. By 2013 just over half of U.S. females aged 13 to 17 had received at least one dose of either the Gardasil or Cervarix vaccine. For males, that figure was a disappointing 35 percent. Now head and neck cancers associated with the virus are on the rise, leading some experts to recommend that a gender-neutral or male-centric approach might be more effective.

HPV is the most prevalent sexually transmitted disease in the U.S. and worldwide, infecting just about all men and women at some point in their lives. Although most people clear the virus naturally, persistent infections with some strains can lead to cancer—usually cervical or oropharyngeal (affecting the back of the throat, tonsils and back of the tongue). HPV-associated cancers make up 3.3 percent of all cancer cases among women and 2 percent of all such cases among men annually in the latest available figures, yet the incidence of virally instigated oropharyngeal and anal cancers is increasing.

Ohio State University medical oncologist and epidemiologist Maura Gillison has studied men with oropharyngeal cancer in three different decades. She and other colleagues first noticed an odd shift in patient profiles in the late 1990s: younger men were showing up in her clinic, often with no significant history of smoking or heavy drinking, which are risk factors for head and neck cancers. She later found that whereas from 1984 to 1989 in the U.S. only 16 percent of oropharyngeal cancers tested positive for HPV, by 2005 that figure had skyrocketed to 73 percent. By 2020 experts project that such cancer diagnoses will exceed those for cervical cancer in the U.S., shifting the burden of HPV-associated cancers from women to men. Gillison reported these findings in October 2014 at the annual ScienceWriters meeting.

Based on these data, Gillison thinks that the female-centric approach to HPV-related cancers in the U.S. should switch to focus on both men and women. Nobel laureate Harald zur Hausen, who discovered 30 years ago that HPV causes cervical cancer, has gone further, saying that males should get the vaccine if only one sex were the focus. The vaccine is currently voluntary in most U.S. states, and only a smattering of vaccination coverage campaigns exist, such as those launched by the New York City Department of Health and the Minnesota Department of Health in the past year. Public health messages and even research literature often fail to mention male vaccination prominently or at all. Unfounded fear of vaccines and claims that the HPV shots would provoke early teen sexuality have hindered efforts to vaccinate broadly in much of the U.S.

No data exist to prove that the vaccines protect against HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer. But such coverage is probable given that the same strains that cause most cervical, vaginal and vulval cancers also cause most head and neck cancers. If a shift in public health policy were to result in an increase in male vaccinations, experts say, at the very least rates of females’ HPV-associated cancers would decrease as a result of fewer infections acquired from men. And the rise in HPV-associated cancers in men would most likely decelerate, plateau or even reverse. A win for all of us.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.
February, 2015|Oral Cancer News|

New research shows possibility of cure for HPV positive throat cancer patients

Source: Eurek Alert! The Global Source for Science News

Nice, France: Patients with cancer of the throat caused by the Human Papilloma virus (HPV+) have a better prognosis than those who are negative for the virus (HPV-). Now, for the first time, researchers have shown with convincing evidence that a group of patients with HPV+ cancer of the oropharynx (the part of the throat located behind the mouth, that makes up the region of the tonsils and the back part of the tongue where it connects to the swallowing part of the throat), can be cured in some cases even after disease has spread to distant organs in the body, like the lungs.

Dr Sophie Huang, Assistant Professor in the Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Canada, will tell the 5th International Conference on Innovative Approaches in Head and Neck Oncology (ICHNO) today (Friday) that her research has shown that, following intensive treatment, certain patients with HPV+ oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) and distant metastases (tumours appearing in an organ not directly related to the primary cancer site) can survive for more than two years without further evidence of disease. Such cancers are usually considered to be incurable, and the goal of treatment is usually limited to symptom control. “Our research, the largest study to date to explore survival predictors for metastatic HPV+ and HPV- oropharyngeal cancer patients, has shown that cure is a realistic goal in those patients with oligometastasis – metastases involving five or fewer lesions in one distant organ”, she will say.

Dr Huang and colleagues identified 934 patients with HPV+ OPC out of the 1238 OPC patients who had been treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between 2000 and 2011. Distant metastases were detected in 15% of these patients; 88 in the HPV+ group and 54 in those with HPV- disease. Oligometastasis was present in 24 HPV+ patients with distant metastases in a single organ.

The researchers found two types of distinct distant metastases in HPV(+) patients: “explosive” and “indolent” metastases. The explosive type metastasis, where more than ten lesions in one organ appear quickly in a short period (within three months of appearance of the first lesion), was present in 55% of the HPV+ group, as opposed to none in those who were HPV-. In both HPV+ and HPV- groups, lung was the most common metastatic site. The indolent type of metastases grow and spread at a much slower pace, most often manifesting as oligometastasis. This occurred in 24% of the HPV+ cases with metastases in a single organ as opposed to 26% of those who had HPV- cancer.

“In the HPV+ group of patients with oligometastases, when they were given definitive local treatment aimed at disease control – for example, a high radiation dose or surgical removal of the metastatic lesion, as opposed to a less aggressive treatment used to control symptoms -there was a long term disease-free period, suggesting that some may be cured,” Dr Huang will say. “In the HPV+ group with oligometases 25% were still alive after three years, whereas the percentage in the HPV- group was 15%.”

The survival advantage in HPV+ OPC patients is due to a number of factors, the researchers say. The cancer is more sensitive to radiotherapy and chemotherapy; the patients tend to be younger (an average age of 55 at diagnosis as opposed to 65) with fewer other health problems, including those caused by smoking-related illness, and this enables them to receive the more aggressive treatment necessary to eradicate metastatic disease.

The percentage of HPV positive to negative OPC cancers varies globally, depending on a number of factors, including the prevalence of smoking and the practice of oral sex. Overall the incidence of HPV+ throat cancers has increased over the past 20 years in developed countries, such as US, Canada, Japan, Australia, and some European countries. [1]

“This research has shown that metastatic HPV+ OPC patients who receive active treatment can survive considerably longer than those who did not receive treatment. One of the reasons patients with metastatic disease do not receive aggressive treatment is due to the physician and patient’s perception that this is an incurable state. We hope that these results will motivate researchers to optimise management strategies for these patients. This will not only help to produce a better quality of life and a return to work for them, but also reduce the cost to healthcare systems,” Dr Huang will say.

“We also hope that our study may trigger research to explore cost-effective methods for the early detection of metastases. Optimising and tailoring surveillance strategies for HPV+ patients are also important. For example, our research has shown that the surveillance period should be longer than the traditional two-year window, due to the possibility of later onset of metastases. Selecting the appropriate imaging method in order to detect asymptomatic oligometastasis (e.g. ultrasound for the early detection of liver metastasis) may allow salvage treatment of some patients before the cancer progresses. Finally, we hope that it will help clinicians identify patients who are best able to benefit from aggressive treatment, such as metastasectomy (surgical removal of the metastases) or stereotactic radiotherapy (highly focused high dose radiotherapy to small regions),” Dr Huang will say.

Whether it is possible to identify which patients at initial presentation are at high risk of developing distant metastasis, and which type of distant metastasis will subsequently develop are other important questions for future studies, say the researchers. “We know there is a degree of correlation between the initial stage and the risk of distant metastasis, but we did not find a strong relationship between this stage and the type of metastasis. The intensity of cigarette smoking in the years prior to the time of diagnosis is a possible factor. Being able to identify such relationships could be a huge help in deciding appropriate treatment at an early stage,” Dr Huang will say.

Although head and neck cancer is the sixth most common type of cancer worldwide, awareness of it is low, and hence the majority of diagnoses are not made until the disease is in an advanced stage, resulting in limited treatment choices and hence a reduction in the chance of survival.

Professor Jean Bourhis, co-chair of the conference scientific committee, said: This important piece of research adds substantially to what we know about the role and the importance of the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) in oropharyngeal cancers and gives real hope of improvement in both diagnosis and treatment to those who are affected by the condition.”

###

1Chaturvedi AK, Anderson WF, Lortet-Tieulent J, et al. Worldwide trends in incidence rates for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Journal of Clinical Oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2013;31(36):4550-9.

Abstract no OC-044: Proffered paper session, Auditorium Athena, Friday 16.00 hrs

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

February, 2015|OCF In The News|