survival

Incisionless robotic surgery offers promising outcomes for oropharyngeal cancer patients

Source: medicalxpress.com
Author: press release, Henry Ford Health System

A new study from researchers at Henry Ford Hospital finds an incisionless robotic surgery – done alone or in conjunction with chemotherapy or radiation – may offer oropharyngeal cancer patients good outcomes and survival, without significant pain and disfigurement.

Patients with cancers of the base of tongue, tonsils, soft palate and pharynx who underwent TransOral Robotic Surgery, or TORS, as the first line of treatment experienced an average three-year survival from time of diagnosis.

Most notably, the study’s preliminary results reveal oropharyngeal cancer patients who are p16 negative – a marker for the human papilloma virus, or HPV, that affects how well cancer will respond to treatment – have good outcomes with TORS in combination with radiation and/or chemotherapy.

“For non-surgical patients, several studies have shown that p16 positive throat cancers, or HPV- related throat cancers, have better survival and less recurrence than p16 negative throat cancers,” says study lead author Tamer Ghanem, M.D., Ph.D., director of Head and Neck Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery Division in the Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery at Henry Ford Hospital.

“Within our study, patients treated with robotic surgery had excellent results and survival, irrespective of their p16 status.”

Study results will be presented Sunday, Sept. 18 at the 2016 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) annual meeting in San Diego.

Led by Dr. Ghanem, Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit was among the first in the country to perform TORS using the da Vinci Surgical System. TORS offers patients an option to remove certain head and neck cancer tumors without visible scarring, while preserving speech and the ability to eat.

With TORS, surgeons can access tumors through the mouth using the slender operating arms of the da Vinci, thus not requiring an open skin incision.

Unlike traditional surgical approaches to head and neck cancer that require a large incision and long recovery, TORS patients are able to return to their normal lives only a few days after surgery without significant pain and disfigurement.

For the study, Dr. Ghanem and his colleagues wanted to take a closer look at the effectiveness of TORS for oropharyngeal cancer patients. They reviewed overall three-year survival, cancer control and metastasis, as well as the effect of p16 status on these variables.

The study included 53 Henry Ford oropharyngeal cancer patients who had TORS. Among them, 83 percent were male, 77 percent were Caucasian, and the mean age was 60.8 years. Thirty-seven percent had TORS alone, while more than 11 percent had TORS with radiation therapy, and more than half received chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

Thirty-seven percent had TORS alone, 11.4 percent received radiation therapy, and 50 percent received chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Eighty-one percent of patients had p16+ disease.

The study shows patients with a p16 negative marker had high survival (100 percent) and low cancer recurrence when TORS was the first line of treatment, as well as when TORS was followed by chemotherapy or radiation therapy.

The majority of patients (63 percent) were able to receive a lower dose of radiation after TORS, which reduces the risk of radiation side effects.

While Dr. Ghanem notes the study’s results are not enough to change clinical practice, it does demonstrate that TORS alone or in conjunction with adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy is an acceptable treatment option for oropharyngeal cancer patients regardless of p16 status.

September, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Expert says Nivolumab Poised to Change Standard of Care in SCCHN

Source: www.onclive.com
Author: Laura Panjwani

Robert-Ferris

Nivolumab (Opdivo) is a game-changing agent for the treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN), according to Robert L. Ferris, MD, PhD.

“Recent findings have shown us that this agent is really the new standard-of-care option for all platinum-refractory patients with head and neck cancer,” says Ferris, vice chair for Clinical Operations, associate director for Translational Research, and co-leader of the Cancer Immunology Program at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. “This is regardless of whether patients are PD-L1–positive or negative or whether they are HPV-positive or negative.”

The PD-L1 inhibitor received a priority review designation by the FDA in July 2016 based on the CheckMate-141 study, which demonstrated a median overall survival (OS) with nivolumab of 7.5 months compared with 5.1 months with investigator’s choice of therapy (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51-0.96; P = .0101) in patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN.

The objective response rate (ORR) was 13.3% with nivolumab and 5.8% for investigator’s choice. The FDA is scheduled to make a decision on the application for the PD-1 inhibitor by November 11, 2016, as part of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act.

Ferris was the lead author on an analysis that further evaluated preliminary data from CheckMate-141, which was presented at the 2016 ASCO Annual Meeting. In an interview with OncLive, he discusses the findings of this study, potential biomarkers for nivolumab, and questions that remain regarding the use of the immunotherapy in SCCHN.

OncLive: What were the updated findings from CheckMate-141 presented at ASCO?

Ferris: The data that were presented at the 2016 ASCO Annual Meeting were further evaluations and follow-up on some preliminary data—originally presented at the 2016 AACR Annual Meeting—that listed the OS results.

At ASCO, we recapped the primary endpoint of OS as an important endpoint for immunotherapies because response rate and progression-free survival may not be as accurate. Ultimately, the FDA and people at large want OS. In this study, OS was 36% at 1 year in the nivolumab-treated arm and 16.6% in the comparator arm, which was investigator’s choice of single-agent chemotherapy, consisting of methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab. In this phase III randomized trial, nivolumab was given in a 2:1 randomization: 240 patients received nivolumab and 120 received investigator’s choice.

Also at ASCO, we presented further evaluations consisting of what the regimens are in the comparator arm. There was about 20% each of docetaxel and methotrexate and 12% of cetuximab. Approximately 60% of the patients had prior cetuximab exposure and we stratified by cetuximab as a prior therapy. We also demonstrated the ORR, which was 13.3% in the nivolumab-treated arm versus 5.8% in the investigator’s choice arm.

Therefore, there was an improvement in overall response, but the difference seemed more modest than the OS benefit—which was a doubling—with 20% more patients alive at 1 year. This reinforces the concept that perhaps response rate may not be the best endpoint. Progression-free survival (PFS) was double at 6 months, with about 20% in the nivolumab arm versus about 9.9% in the investigator’s choice arm. The median PFS was not different, but the 6-month PFS was twice as high. The time to response was about 2 months in each arm at the first assessment.

Your analysis also looked at biomarkers. Can you discuss these findings and their significance?

The p16 or HPV-positive group had a better hazard ratio for OS than the overall study population. The hazard ratio was .73 for the overall population, using a preplanned interim analysis. With the HPV-positive group, we had a hazard ratio of .55 and the HPV-negative group had a hazard ratio of .99. It is still favoring the nivolumab-treated patients but, with the curves separated earlier in the HPV-positive group, one could see the improvement with nivolumab at about 1 to 2 months. It took 7 or 8 months with the HPV-negative group to show a separation of the curves in favor of nivolumab.

We looked at PD-L1 levels, and PD-L1—using a 1% or above level—had an improvement in the PD-L1–positive patients in favor of nivolumab in terms of OS and ORR. When we looked at 5% and 10% thresholds of PD-L1, the OS did not seem to improve. Therefore, in all levels above 1%, the OS was similarly beneficial over the PD-L1 less-than-1% group. However, essentially all levels of PD-L1–positivity and PD-L1–negativity still favored nivolumab, but the benefit was more when its levels were greater than 1%.

We could combine HPV status with PD-L1 status and look at subsets; however, essentially every subset benefited, whether it was PD-L1–negative or positive. This indicates that, in this group of patients, who progress within 6 months of platinum-based therapy, that no current systemic therapeutic options benefit patients as well as nivolumab.

With regard to these findings, what are you most excited about?

Head and neck cancer is a difficult disease. Until recently, we didn’t know the impact of this enrichment for HPV-positive virus-induced subsets and we didn’t know if this was an immune responsive cancer. Clearly, it is. We have all of the hallmarks that we have seen for a bright future—based on the melanoma data—and a series of other cancers indicating response rates in the 15% to 20% range, suggesting that we now have a platform of the PD-1 pathway to combine with other checkpoints and to integrate earlier in disease with radiation and chemotherapy.

We have a demonstration of head and neck cancer as an immune-responsive cancer. We are beginning to get an idea of the biomarkers and starting to be able to segment patients who will benefit. Now, we have a large comparative trial with an OS endpoint and tissue to look at biomarkers to try and understand what the best future combinations will be.

What are some questions that you still hope to answer regarding nivolumab in head and neck cancer?

We have to get down deeper into the nonresponders. We should acknowledge that the majority of patients neither had a response nor benefited. Understanding who is more likely to benefit is useful, but we also need to understand the levels of alternative checkpoint receptors or other biomarkers of resistance.

We have sequential lymphocyte specimens from the peripheral blood, tissues, and serum so those are intensively under evaluation. There are interferon gamma signatures that have risen from the melanoma checkpoint field that will certainty be applied, as well.

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

August, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Type 2 diabetes drug could be beneficial for head and neck cancer patients

Source: www.eurekalert.org
Author: press release

Researchers at the University of Cincinnati (UC) College of Medicine have found that adding increasing doses of an approved Type 2 diabetes drug, metformin, to a chemotherapy and radiation treatment regimen in head and neck cancer patients is not well tolerated if escalated too quickly, but allowing slower escalation could be beneficial.

These findings are being presented via poster June 4 at the 2016 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting: Collective Wisdom, being held June 3-7 in Chicago.

Trisha Wise-Draper, MD, PhD, assistant professor in the Division of Hematology Oncology at the UC College of Medicine, a member of both the Cincinnati Cancer Center and UC Cancer Institute and principal investigator on this study, says retrospective studies have shown improved outcomes in tumors treated with chemotherapy and radiation if they were also on metformin for diabetes.

“In head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, which develops in the mucous membranes of the mouth, nose and throat, diabetic patients taking a medication called metformin had better overall survival compared to those not on metformin when also treated with chemotherapy and radiation,” she says. “Additionally, pancreatic cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and metformin required higher doses of metformin–1,000 milligrams twice a day–to experience positive results.

“In basic science studies, metformin has been shown to stop mTOR, a molecular pathway present and active in this type of head and neck cancer, and pretreatment with metformin resulted in a decrease in the occurrence of oral cavity tumors in animal models. In this study, we wanted to see if the combination of escalating doses of metformin with the chemotherapy agent cisplatin and radiation for head and neck cancer tumors in non-diabetic patients would be effective.”

Wise-Draper says that metformin, which is an approved Type 2 diabetes medication, was provided by their investigational pharmacy. Metformin was administered orally in escalating doses for 7 to 14 days prior to starting the cisplatin and radiation and continued throughout standard treatment. Blood samples were collected before and after metformin treatment as well as during chemotherapy. Flow cytometry, a technique used to count cells, was used to detect the percent of circulating immune activated cells, and clinical laboratory tests including glucose, B12 and C-peptide (an amino acid that is important for controlling insulin) were performed.

“This is part of an ongoing clinical trial,” says Wise-Draper. “We found that eight patients with advanced head and neck cancer have been enrolled so far; we plan to have 30 total. Due to the relatively quick escalation of metformin, the patients’ tolerance was poor with higher doses of metformin when initiated 7 days prior to their chemotherapy and radiation therapy regimen.

“Therefore, the protocol was modified to allow slower escalation over 14 days. The most common toxicities observed included nausea (71 percent of patients) and vomiting (43 percent of patients), increase in creatinine (57 percent of patients), decreased white blood cell count (43 percent of patients) and pain when swallowing (43 percent of patients) with only nausea being directly attributed to metformin and the rest attributed to cisplatin and radiation.”

She adds that there wasn’t a substantial change in T cell or glucose levels with administration of metformin in the small sample of patients but that there were increased C-peptide levels in response to metformin administration.

“These results show that the combination of metformin and cisplatin and radiation was poorly tolerated when metformin was escalated quickly. However, there has been no significant increase in side effects thus far with the addition of metformin,” Wise-Draper says. “The trial is continuing with escalation of metformin over a longer period of time to provide more data; we will also try to increase our sample size.”

Note:
This research is being funded by the UC Cancer Institute. Wise-Draper cites no conflict of interest.

BMS gets US breakthrough status for head & neck cancer

Source: pharmatimes.com
Author: Selina McKee

US regulators have awarded Bristol-Myers Squibb’s immunotherapy Opdivo a breakthrough designation for the potential indication of recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). The move, which should help expedite the drug’s development and review, comes after preliminary clinical evidence indicated it could offer a substantial survival benefit to patients with the condition who have already received platinum-based therapy.

A first look at the data from the Phase III CheckMate-141 trial, stopped early in January 2016 after meeting its primary endpoint of overall survival, showed that patients treated with Opdivo (nivolumab) experienced a 30 percent reduction in the risk of death compared to the investigator’s choice of therapy (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab), with a median overall survival of 7.5 months versus to 5.1 months.

Safety signals were also looking good, with treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurring in 58.9 percent of patients on Opdivo versus 77.5 percent of patients on investigator’s choice. Grade 3-4 TRAEs were reported in 13.1 percent of patients on Opdivo compared to 35.1 percent taking the investigator’s choice, while two drug-related deaths were reported as related to Opdivo (pneumonitis and hypercalcaemia), and one Grade 5 event of lung infection in the comparator arm.

The findings are particularly pertinent given the particularly bleak outlook for patients whose disease has progressed after platinum therapy and lack of systemic therapies to improve survival, and thus significant unmet medical need for new options.

Head and neck cancer is the seventh most common cancer globally, with an estimated 400,000 to 600,000 new cases per year and 223,000 to 300,000 deaths per year. The five-year survival rate is reported as less than 4% for metastatic Stage IV disease.

Opdivo is already available in the US to treat certain forms of melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer and renal cell carcinoma. This marks its fifth breakthrough designation from the FDA, and follows that for classical Hodgkin lymphoma issued just days ago.

April, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Chemotherapy + radiation may improve survival for some elderly

Source: journals.lww.com
Author: Carlson, Robert H., Oncology Times

Because the toxicity of concurrent chemoradiation is greater than radiation therapy alone for definitive head and neck cancer treatment, many clinicians have reservations about offering chemoradiotherapy for elderly head and neck cancer patients.

But a new study shows that combining chemotherapy with radiation therapy improves survival rates for those head and neck cancer patients ages 71 to 79 years who have low comorbidity scores and advanced disease stage, with survival rates similar to that of younger patients.

The study, which used data from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), suggests elderly patients are being underrepresented in prospective clinical trials that have defined standards of care for head and neck cancer.

“In the era of improved radiation techniques, improved systemic therapy, and better supportive care, we found that chemoradiotherapy does, in fact, improve survival for a large segment of this population,” said Sana Karam, MD, PhD, Assistant Professor of Radiation Oncology at the University of Colorado School of Medicine in Aurora, and senior author on the study.“

“These findings challenge historical data demonstrating no benefit of chemoradiotherapy for patients older than 70 years,” Karam said.

The study was presented at the 2016 Multidisciplinary Head & Neck Cancer Symposium, sponsored by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). First author is Arya Amini, MD, a fourth-year resident in the Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.

Before the meeting, Karam discussed the study in an online audio preview for the press.

She said current guidelines for treatment of elderly head and neck cancer are based on trials that are included in the MACH-NC meta-analysis of 16,485 patients in 87 randomized trials (Radiotherapy and Oncology 2009;92:4-14).

While the meta-analysis confirmed a benefit of concomitant chemotherapy in locally-advanced head and neck cancer greater than the benefit with induction chemotherapy, it showed those benefits decreasing with age with no overall survival benefit for patients age 71 and above.

“But only 4 percent of the patients in this meta-analysis were age 71 and above, compared with 9 percent of the 2010 U.S. Census,” Karam pointed out. “The meta-analysis was underpowered, yet it has set our clinical practice guidelines.”

The researchers examined records from the NCDB for patients older than between 1998 and 2011. From 1998-2011, 23 percent of patients in the database were over age 70. Cases for these elderly patients were stratified by whether or not they received chemotherapy concurrent with radiotherapy.

All patients received definitive radiotherapy (66.0-81.6 Gy in 1.2-2.0 Gy fractions). Concurrent chemoradiation was defined as beginning a course of chemotherapy 14 days before or after the start of radiotherapy.

Karam said 68 percent of the patients received radiotherapy alone, and 32 percent received chemoradiotherapy.

Five-Year Survival Improved If Comorbidity Low
The study showed that five-year survival in head and neck cancer patients ages 71 to 79 years was 30.3 percent with concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, versus 15.2 percent for radiotherapy alone.

“Our results showed clearly a significant overall survival benefit with the addition of chemotherapy to radiation therapy,” Karam said.

Chemoradiotherapy was associated with improved survival when patients had comorbidity scores of zero or one, and advanced disease stage.

The researchers also found an overall survival benefit of chemoradiotherapy for patients treated with intensity modulated radiotherapy.

But patients who did not see an overall survival benefit from chemoradiotherapy tended to be ages 79 or older, had a comorbidity score of two or greater, or presented with T-I or T-II disease.

The trend toward worse overall survival for patients with multiple comorbidities was only marginally significant, Karam added.

“These findings may aid clinicians in discussing treatment options with their elderly head and neck cancer patients, and they could guide future prospective trials to confirm the benefit of multimodality treatment in elderly patients, not only for head and neck cancer, but for other cancer sites as well,” Karam said.

Comorbidity, Not Age
In an online audio preview of the meeting for the press, moderator Christine G. Gourin, MD, Associate Professor of Narratology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, said, “These data show us that the key factor is not age, but comorbidity. As we age, we collect comorbidities, and that’s what is probably more significant.”

Gourin commented on the MACH-NC meta-analysis, “that we all know is used by our colleagues in Europe to support not using chemotherapy in elderly patients.

She said her own research using the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) Medicare database found survival results can differ by tumor site—chemoradiation is superior to radiation in oropharyngeal cancer in terms of survival, she said; but in larynx cancer, overall survival is actually worse for chemoradiation.

Those differences were due to late toxicity of treatment, aspiration pneumonia, and dyspepsia.

Karam said her research also found differences between those two tumor sites, but that chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival for both subsets nonetheless.

“There are many differences in the data sets between the NCDB and SEER Medicare databases, including the historic staging analysis. The patient populations are a little different; our reviewers picked up on that when we were submitting the manuscript.”

“Unfortunately, we don’t have a clear cut variable for toxicity, but we did look at time to completion of radiotherapy. We found that patients who got concurrent chemoradiation had a longer time to completion of radiotherapy, suggesting perhaps more treatment breaks.”

“But even after controlling for treatment breaks, we still saw an overall survival advantage regardless of the subset, except for the very elderly and those with multiple comorbidities,” Karam said.

Source:
Oncology Times: 25 April 2016 – Volume 38 – Issue 8 – p 27
doi: 10.1097/01.COT.0000482924.27883.03

April, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Having a partner increases cancer survival rates: Australian study

Source: www.theaustralian.com.au
Author: Sean Parnell

People diagnosed with cancer are more likely to die if they do not have a partner, according to a new Australian study.

Researchers from Cancer Council Queensland and Queensland University of Technology examined 176,050 cases of the 10 most common cancers in Queensland, diagnosed between 1996 and 2012. They found the chance of death was 26 per cent higher for men who did not have a partner compared to those who did, and 20 per cent higher for women who did not have a partner, across all cancers.

“The reasons for higher survival in partnered patients still remains unclear, but are likely to include economic, psychosocial, environmental, and structural factors,” CCQ professor Jeff Dunn said yesterday.

“Having a partner has been linked to a healthier lifestyle, greater financial resources and increased practical or social support while undergoing treatment.

“Support from a partner can also influence treatment choices and increase social support to help manage the psychosocial effects of cancer.”

The increased risk varied depending on the type of cancer. For men without a partner, it ranged from 2 per cent for lung cancer to 30 per cent for head and neck cancer, while for women without a partner it ranged from 2 per cent for kidney and lung cancer to 41 per cent for uterine cancer.

“Health professionals managing cancer patients should be aware of the increased mortality risk among unpartnered patients, and tailor follow-up treatment accordingly,” Professor Dunn said.

Of the 176,050 patients analysed for the study, 68 per cent had a partner, which included those who were married or in a de facto relationship. The researchers published their findings in the journal Cancer Epidemiology and suggested a better understanding of the relationship factor might help improve cancer management and outcomes.

March, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Depressed Head and Neck Cancer Patients Have Lower Survival and Higher Recurrence Risk

Source: www.OncologyNurseAdvisor.com
Author: Kathy Boltz, PhD
 

Depression is a significant predictor of 5-year survival and recurrence in patients with head and neck cancer, according to a new study published in Pyschosomatic Medicine (doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000256). These findings represent one of the largest studies to report on the impact of depression on cancer survival.

Although depression can have obvious detrimental effects on a person’s quality of life, its impact on cancer patients is more apparent, explained lead author Eileen Shinn, PhD, assistant professor of Behavioral Science at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, in Houston. Increasing evidence shows modest associations between elevated symptoms of depression and greater risk for mortality among patients with lung, breast, ovarian, and kidney cancers.

The research team sought to clarify the influence of depression on survival, focusing their analysis on a single cancer type. By limiting the sample set and adjusting for factors known to affect outcome, such as age, tumor size, and previous chemotherapy, they were able to uncover a more profound impact of depression.

The researchers followed 130 patients at MD Anderson with newly diagnosed oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), a type of cancer in which the tumor originates at the back of the throat and base of the tongue.

At the beginning of their radiation therapy, Patients completed a validated questionnaire at the beginning of their radiation therapy to identify symptoms of clinical depression. Researchers monitored the participants, all of whom completed treatment, until their last clinic visit or death, a median period of 5 years.

“The results of this study were quite intriguing, showing depression was a significant factor predicting survival at 5 years, even after controlling for commonly accepted prognostic factors,” said senior author Adam Garden, MD, professor, Radiation Oncology. Furthermore, depression was the only factor shown to have a significant impact on survival.

Patients who scored as depressed on the questionnaire were 3.5 times less likely to have survived to the 5-year interval compared with those who did not score as depressed. The degree of depression was also found to be significant, as every unit increase on this scale indicated a 10% higher risk for reduced survival.

The results were replicated with a different psychological health survey and were not influenced by how soon following diagnosis the depression assessment was done.

OSCC is diagnosed in 10 000 to 15 000 Americans each year. Major risk factors known to be associated with OSCC include smoking and tobacco use, alcohol consumption, and human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Incidence of OSCC has doubled in the last 20 years due to increasing HPV infection rates, noted Shinn.

Neither alcohol nor tobacco use, also surveyed in this group, had a significant impact on survival. HPV infection status, when available, also did not appear correlated.

Despite a high cure rate, normally 60% to 80%, recurrence rate of disease is unusually high in these patients (approximately 30%). The researchers also investigated a potential link between depression and disease recurrence.

“When we controlled for all variables, depression was linked with a nearly 4 times higher risk of recurrence,” said Shinn. In addition, never smokers had a 73% lower chance of recurrence, compared with current smokers. Those were the only two factors associated with cancer recurrence.

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

December, 2015|Oral Cancer News|

Depression and smoking linked to worse prognosis in oral cancer

Source: medicalresearch.com
Author: staff

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Eileen H. Shinn PhD
Assistant Professor, Department of Behavioral Science
Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, MD Anderson Cancer Center

Medical Research:
What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?

Dr. Shinn:
Recent studies with leukemia, breast, lung, renal and liver cancer patients have shown that patients with depression have worsened survival. These effect sizes are small, but independent of any of the traditional factors that are known to impact survival, such as extent of cancer, types of treatment administered and baseline health and age of the patient. The current thinking is that cancer patients who are depressed have chronically heightened responses to stress; the constant release of stress hormones trigger changes in the tumor itself (such as noradrenergically-driven tumor angiogenesis) or may weakens the body’s immune function and ability to resist tumor growth.

When we measured depression in newly diagnosed patients with oropharyngeal cancer (cancer of the base of tongue and tonsil), we found that those patients who scored as depressed were 3.5 times more likely to have died within the five year period after their diagnosis, compared to non-depressed patients. We also found that patients who were depressed were also 3.8 times more likely to have their cancer recur within the first five years after diagnosis. We also found that patients who continued to smoke after diagnosis were more likely to recur within the first five years. These effect sizes were larger than those typically found in recent studies. We believe that the larger effect size may be due to the tight eligibility criteria ( e.g., we did not include patients who already had recurrent disease, we only included patients with one specific type of head and neck cancer, oropharyngeal) and also due to controlling other known factors (all patients completed individualized treatment regimens of radiation/ chemoradiation at a comprehensive cancer center and patients with more advanced disease stage were more likely to have received treatment intensification compared to patients with early stage disease). In all, we had 130 patients, one of the largest prospective studies with oropharyngeal cancer to examine the effect of depression on cancer outcome.

Medical Research:
What should clinicians and patients take away from your report?

Dr. Shinn:
With important factors, such as careful diagnosis, staging and individualized multidisciplinary treatment plans, being equal, depression status may impact patient recurrence and survival in oropharyngeal cancer.

Medical Research:
What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this study?

Dr. Shinn:
These results need to be replicated in a larger study, with particular attention paid to repeated measures of depression as well as possible bio-behavioral markers of tumor growth and chronic stress.

December, 2015|Oral Cancer News|

Factors linked with better survival in oral cancer identified

Source: www.cancertherapyadvisor.com
Author: staff

Factors associated with improved survival in oral cavity squamous cell cancer (OCSCC) include neck dissection and treatment at academic or research institutions, according to a study published in JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery.

Alexander L. Luryi, from the Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Conn., and colleagues analyzed correlations between treatment variables and survival in patients with stages I and II OCSCC. Data were included for 6,830 patients.

The researchers found that five-year survival was 69.7 percent. Treatment factors that correlated with improved survival on univariate analysis included treatment at academic or research institutions, no radiation therapy, no chemotherapy, and negative margins (all P < 0.001).

Improved survival was also seen in association with neck dissection (P = 0.001). Treatment at academic or research institutions correlated with increased likelihood of receiving neck dissection and decreased likelihood of receiving radiation therapy or having positive margins.

Neck dissection and treatment at academic or research institutions correlated with improved survival on multivariate analysis (hazard ratios, 0.85 and 0.88, respectively), while compromised survival was seen for positive margins, insurance through Medicare, and adjuvant radiation therapy or chemotherapy (hazard ratios, 1.27, 1.45, 1.31, and 1.34, respectively).

“Overall survival for early OCSCC varies with demographic and tumor characteristics but also varies with treatment and system factors, which may represent targets for improving outcomes in this disease,” the authors write.

Reference
Luryi, Alexander L., BS, et al. “Treatment Factors Associated With Survival in Early-Stage Oral Cavity Cancer: Analysis of 6830 Cases From the National Cancer Data Base.” JAMA Otolaryngology – Head & Neck Surgery. doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2015.0719. [epub ahead of print]. May 14, 2015.

Possibility of cure For HPV positive throat cancer patients—new research

Source: au.ibtimes.com
Author: Samantha Richardson

A new research conducted by Dr. Sophie Huang, assistant professor in the Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Canada revealed that throat cancer caused by the Human Papilloma virus (HPV+) can possibly be cured. The research is of utmost importance as it is the first to provide substantial evidence to prove that patients suffering from oropharynx cancer can be healed.

The disease also spreads to other parts of the body. The press release disclosed that the tumours remain passive and go undetected for over two years in most case, which makes it incurable. The research was presented at the 5th International Conference on Innovative Approaches in Head and Neck Oncology (ICHNO) on Friday. She states that cure is possible among patients suffering from oropharyngeal cancer is possible for the first time.

“Our research, the largest study to date to explore survival predictors for metastatic HPV+ and HPV- oropharyngeal cancer patients,” says Dr. Huang.

For the research, 934 patients suffering from HPV+ OPC were studied. All subjects were patients treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between 2000 and 2011. The researchers found two types of distinct metastases or tumours in other parts of the body away from the source in HPV+ patients: “explosive” and “indolent” metastases. The former grows and spreads quicker while the latter is slower and manifests itself as oligometastasis. However, they found the lung as the most common metastatic site in both HPV+ and HPV- patients. According to Dr. Huang, more aggressive treatments solely aimed at disease control resulted in a long term disease-free period, suggesting that some may be cured.

“In the HPV+ group with oligometases 25% were still alive after three years, whereas the percentage in the HPV- group was 15%,” the press release stated. The reason for higher survival rates among HPV+ patients is the younger age of the patients. In addition, the cancer is more sensitive to radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Those who receive treatment are at an advantage and can survive longer than those who do not undergo the process. Early detection of metastases and aggressive treatment can cure the patient.

Dr. Huang explained that they were aware of the correlation between the initial stages and the risk of a tumour on another site of the body. However, the degree by which they are related remains unknown. She highlights that identifying such relationships could help find an appropriate treatment at an early stage.

Professor Jean Bourhis, co-chair of the conference scientific committee, says that this is a very important research with respect to finding the cure of oropharynx cancer. He states that it provides hope in both the treatment and diagnosis of the patients.

February, 2015|Oral Cancer News|