survival

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|

Coupling head and neck cancer screening and lung cancer scans could improve early detection, survival

Source: www.medicalnewstoday.com
Author: staff

Adding head and neck cancer screenings to recommended lung cancer screenings would likely improve early detection and survival, according to a multidisciplinary team led by scientists affiliated with the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute (UPCI), a partner with UPMC CancerCenter.

In an analysis published in the journal Cancer and funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the team provides a rationale for a national clinical trial to assess the effectiveness of adding examination of the head and neck to lung cancer screening programs. People most at risk for lung cancer are also those most at risk for head and neck cancer.

“When caught early, the five-year survival rate for head and neck cancer is over 83 percent,” said senior author Brenda Diergaarde, Ph.D., assistant professor of epidemiology at Pitt’s Graduate School of Public Health and member of the UPCI. “However, the majority of cases are diagnosed later when survival rates generally shrink below 50 percent. There is a strong need to develop strategies that will result in identification of the cancer when it can still be successfully treated.”

Screening patients for head and neck cancer and lung cancer could improve early detection and survival.

Screening patients for head and neck cancer and lung cancer could improve early detection and survival.

Head and neck cancer is the world’s sixth-most common type of cancer. Worldwide every year, 600,000 people are diagnosed with it and about 350,000 die. Tobacco use and alcohol consumption are the major risk factors for developing the cancer.

The early symptoms are typically a lump or sore in the mouth or throat, trouble swallowing or a voice change, which are often brushed off as a cold or something that will heal. Treatment, particularly in later stages, can be disfiguring and can change the way a person talks or eats.

Dr. Diergaarde and her team analyzed the records of 3,587 people enrolled in the Pittsburgh Lung Screening Study (PLuSS), which consists of current and ex-smokers aged 50 and older, to see if they had a higher chance of developing head and neck cancer.

In the general U.S. population, fewer than 43 per 100,000 people would be expected to develop head and neck cancer annually among those 50 and older. Among the PLuSS participants, the rate was 71.4 cases annually per 100,000 people.

Recently, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force*, as well as the American Cancer Society and several other organizations, recommended annual screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography in people 55 to 74 years old with a smoking history averaging at least a pack a day for a total of 30 years. The recommendation came after a national clinical trial showed that such screening reduces lung cancer mortality.

“Head and neck cancer is relatively rare, and screening the general population would be impractical,” said co-author David O. Wilson, M.D., M.P.H., associate director of UPMC’s Lung Cancer Center. “However, the patients at risk for lung cancer whom we would refer for the newly recommended annual screening are the same patients that our study shows also likely would benefit from regular head and neck cancer screenings. If such screening reduces mortality in these at-risk patients, that would be a convenient way to increase early detection and save lives.”

Dr. Diergaarde’s team is collaborating with otolaryngologists to design a national trial that would determine if regular head and neck cancer screenings for people referred for lung cancer screenings would indeed reduce mortality.

January, 2015|Oral Cancer News|

Experience counts with radiation for head and neck cancer

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

When it comes to specialized cancer surgery, the more experienced the surgeon, the better the outcome is generally true. The same might hold true for radiation therapy used to treat head and neck cancer, according to a new study.

Published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology(1) with an accompanying editorial(2), the study compared survival and other outcomes in 470 patients treated with radiation therapy at 101 treatment centers through a clinical trial held from 2002 to 2005. The trial was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and organized by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG). It was conducted by researchers at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital in Columbus.

The findings indicated that patients treated at the less-experienced centers were more likely to have cancer recurrence compared with highly experienced centers (62% vs 42%, respectively, at 5 years) and had poorer overall survival compared with those at the highly experienced centers (51% vs 69% 5-year survival, respectively).

“Our findings suggest that institutional experience strongly influences outcomes in patients treated with radiation therapy for head and neck cancer,” said first author Evan Wuthrick, MD. “They indicate that patients do better when treated at centers where more of these procedures are performed versus centers that do fewer.”

Radiation therapy for head and neck cancer requires complex treatment planning that can vary considerably between institutions and physicians. In addition, significant short-term and long-term side effects can occur that require management by a carefully coordinated multidisciplinary care team.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend that head and neck cancer patients receive treatment at experienced centers, but whether provider experience affects outcomes was previously unknown.

The research team used participation in previous RTOG head and neck cancer clinical trials as a surrogate for experience. They identified 88 low-accruing centers that enrolled an average of four patients yearly to the trials, and 13 high-accruing centers that enrolled an average of 65 patients annually. Next, the researchers compared outcomes based on whether patients were treated at the high-accruing (more experienced) or low-accruing (less experienced) centers.

They found that 5-year local recurrence rates were higher among patients treated at less experienced centers versus more experienced centers (36% vs 21%). The radiation therapy plan was more likely to deviate from protocol at less experienced centers (18% vs 6%).

Treatment at low-accruing centers was associated with a 91% increased risk of death and an 89% increase in progression or death when compared with high-accruing centers.

Institutional elements not assessed by the study that can also influence outcomes included use of a tumor board, the number of colleagues and their years of practice, and ancillary services such as speech and swallowing therapy, diet and nutrition support, and specialized nursing.

References:
1. (2014; doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.56.5218)
2. (doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.58.2239)

January, 2015|Oral Cancer News|

Study suggests that experience counts when it comes to head and neck cancer treatments

Source: medicalxpress.com
Author: staff
 

When it comes to specialized cancer surgery, it’s generally true that the more experienced the surgeon, the better the outcome. The same might hold true for radiation therapy used to treat head and neck cancer, according to a new study led by researchers Evan Wuthrick, MD, assistant professor of radiation oncology at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (OSUCCC – James), and Maura Gillison, MD, PhD, professor of internal medicine and epidemiology at the OSUCCC – James.

Published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology with an accompanying editorial, the study compared survival and other outcomes in 470 patients treated with radiation therapy at 101 treatment centers through a clinical trial held from 2002 to 2005. The trial was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and organized by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG).

The findings indicated that patients treated at the less-experienced centers were more likely to have cancer recurrence (62 percent versus 42 percent at five years) and had poorer overall survival compared with those at the highly-experienced centers (51 percent versus 69 percent five-year survival, respectively).

“Our findings suggest that institutional experience strongly influences outcomes in patients treated with radiation therapy for head and neck cancer,” says Wuthrick, the paper’s first author. “They indicate that patients do better when treated at centers where more of these procedures are performed versus centers that do fewer.”

Radiation therapy for head and neck cancer requires complex treatment planning that can vary considerably between institutions and physicians. In addition, significant short-term and long-term side effects can occur that require management by a carefully coordinated multidisciplinary care team. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend that head and neck cancer patients receive treatment at experienced centers, but whether provider experience affects outcomes was previously unknown.

Wuthrick, Gillison and their colleagues used participation in previous RTOG head and neck cancer clinical trials as a surrogate for experience. They identified 88 low-accruing centers that enrolled an average of four patients yearly to the trials, and 13 high-accruing centers that enrolled an average of 65 patients annually. Next, the researchers compared outcomes based on whether patients were treated at the high-accruing (more experienced) or low-accruing (less experienced) centers.

The study’s key findings include:

  • Five-year local recurrence rates were higher among patients treated at less experienced centers versus more experienced centers (36 percent and 21 percent, respectively);
  • The radiation therapy plan was more likely to deviate from protocol at less experienced centers (18 percent versus 6 percent);
  • Treatment at low-accruing centers was associated with a 91-percent increased risk of death and an 89-percent increase in progression or death when compared with high-accruing centers.

Institutional elements not assessed by the study that can also influence outcomes included use of a tumor board, the number of colleagues and their years of practice, and ancillary services such as speech and swallowing therapy, dietetic and nutritional support, and specialized nursing.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.
December, 2014|OCF In The News|

Antacids may improve head and neck cancer survival

Source: www.webmd.com
Author: Robert Preidt

Using antacids to control acid reflux may improve head and neck cancer patients’ chances of survival, a new study suggests.

The researchers examined the effects that two types of antacids — proton pump inhibitors and histamine 2 blockers — had on head and neck cancer patients. More than two-thirds of the nearly 600 patients in the study took one or both types of the antacids after their cancer diagnosis.

Acid reflux — commonly known as heartburn — is a common side effect of chemotherapy or radiation treatment, according to the researchers. Proton pump inhibitors include drugs such as Prilosec, Nexium and Prevacid, while histamine 2 blockers include drugs such as Tagamet, Zantac and Pepcid.

Compared to patients who didn’t take antacids, those who took proton pump inhibitors had a 45 percent lower risk of death, according to the researchers. They also found that those who took histamine 2 blockers had a 33 percent lower risk of death.

The study is published in the December issue of the journal Cancer Prevention Research.

“We had suspicions that these medications somehow had a favorable impact on patient outcomes. This led us to review our large cohort of patients and screen them for common medications, focusing on antacids. In fact, our study did show that people taking antacids are doing better,” study author Dr. Silvana Papagerakis, research assistant professor of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery at the University of Michigan Medical School, said in a university news release.

It’s not clear why antacids may improve survival. But, the researchers have started looking for answers to that question.

“Currently, patients might be on and off of this medication according to their symptoms of acid reflux. We believe this medication can also be beneficial at stopping cancer progression. Perhaps longer duration of treatments may have significant effect in terms of outcome survival,” Papagerakis said.

“What this study makes clear is these medications may be more beneficial to the patients than just controlling side effects,” Papagerakis added.

The researchers also want to investigate if the use of antacids by people with reflux disease or with precancerous lesions might reduce their risk of developing head and neck cancer.

December, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Number of immune cells in tumors could soon help predict and treat cancers

Source: www.science20.com
Authors: Emma King, University of Southampton and Christian Ottensmeier, University of Southampton

Immune cells in the blood primarily defend us against infection. But we’re now learning that these cells can also keep us free from cancer. Patients with less efficient immune systems such as organ transplant recipients or those with untreated HIV, for example, are more susceptible to cancers. It is also becoming increasingly apparent that we can use immune cells to predict survival in people who do develop cancer. And that, in fact, there are immune cells within cancers.

Head and neck cancer underway

Head and neck cancer underway

The number of immune cells inside a tumor can hugely vary: some patients have vast numbers while some have very few. In a recent study, we showed that in head and neck cancers, the survival of a patient depends on how many immune cells are within the tumor. This could be a valuable way of individualizing cancer treatments.

Patients with lots of immune cells, for example, could be offered less toxic cancer treatment while those with few immune cells may need more aggressive treatment to improve their chances of survival.

Not all immune cells within the tumor are able to “attack” the cancer. By looking at specific cell markers – proteins on the cell exterior that allow us to see whether, for example, cells are exhausted – we can determine which individual immune cells in the tumor will be effective in tackling the cancer, or if they are exhausted and not able to perform any useful function. It’s possible that these exhausted cells could be reinvigorated to become useful again with targeted immunotherapy treatments currently in development.

These include vaccines, so if a cancer has been caused by a virus, we can vaccinate the patient with a short segment of the same virus to encourage the immune system to react to it. Around 30% of head and neck cancers, for example, are the result of human papillomavirus (HPV). There has been a 225% increase in these types of cancers over the past 15-20 years and in the US, HPV will cause more of these cancers than cervical ones. In these cases, cancer cells continue to express part of the HPV on their surface. The hope is that following vaccination, immune cells will be better able to identify these HPV cancer cells and kill them.

For people who simply don’t have many immune cells in tumors, specific, targeted immunotherapy could be one option. But also broader “brush stroke” treatments. These broader treatments cover all immunotherapies that encourage a patient’s immune system in a fairly non-specific way. Our immune cells are normally very tightly regulated and include many fail-safe systems to prevent them from over-reacting primarily to infections. General immunotherapy takes the brakes off and allows the immune cells to react to the cancer cells.

It may be that a combination of specific vaccine and non-specific immune treatments could be enough in combination to tip the balance in favor of the patient’s immune system so that it is able to overcome the cancer.

We’re going to further investigate how immune cells might help us to fight cancer and two head and neck cancer immunotherapy trials are due to start at the University of Southampton in the next six months.

One of these trials will look at a HPV cancer vaccine, while the other will investigate a non-specific immunotherapy molecule for those 70% of patients that develop head and neck cancer independent of HPV. Our hope is that within five years the results of these trials could influence the way we treat cancers.The Conversation

Note: This article was originally published on The Conversation.

September, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Docetaxel regimen tops cisplatin in head and neck cancer

Source: www.cancernetwork.com
Author: Anna Azvolinsky, PhD

A phase II study has demonstrated that combining docetaxel-based chemoradiotherapy and the antibody cetuximab postoperatively in patients with high-risk squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck led to improved disease-free and overall survival, with no unexpected toxicities. The results of the study were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

Two-hundred and thirty-eight stage III and IV patients were randomized to receive radiation therapy (60 Gy) plus cetuximab and either cisplatin (30 mg/m2) or docetaxel (15 mg/m2) once per week as part of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0234 clinical trial.

The 2-year overall survival (OS) was 69% in the cisplatin treatment arm and 79% in the docetaxel treatment arm. The 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 57% and 66% in the cisplatin and docetaxel arms, respectively.

Previously, two large phase III trials, the RTOG 9501 and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 22931 trials, both showed a small but significant survival benefit for postoperative head and neck cancer patients who received adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy concurrently, resulting in the incorporation of cisplatin in an adjuvant regimen for high-risk patients. The drawback was that adding cisplatin to radiation therapy increased toxicity. Many of these patients are not candidates for the combination therapy due to poor performance status, older age, and renal insufficiency. The purpose of the current trial was to test whether combining a molecular therapy such as cetuximab with chemotherapy would improve survival with a better toxicity profile, compared with radiation therapy plus chemotherapy.

After a median follow-up of 4.4 years, 48 patients in the cisplatin arm had a DFS event compared with 51 patients in the docetaxel arm. Cisplatin patients had a 24% reduction (P = .05) and docetaxel patients had a 31% reduction (P = .01) in the DFS failure rate compared with a historical control arm (the RTOG 9501 trial).

Patients who had p16-positive oropharynx tumors (43 of 54 patients) had improved survival compared with those who had p16-negative oropharynx disease.

The most common high-grade non-hematologic adverse events were mucositis, dysphagia, and skin rash, seen in both the cisplatin and docetaxel treatment arms. Patients in the cisplatin arm had a greater frequency of high-grade hematologic toxicities compared with those in the docetaxel arm (27.8% vs 14.2%, respectively). More patients in the docetaxel arm had toxicities deemed unacceptable by those conducting the trial (12.3% in the docetaxel arm vs 9.3% in the cisplatin arm).

Cetuximab is a chimeric human monoclonal antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR).

“The delivery of postoperative chemoradiotherapy (using cisplatin or docetaxel once per week plus 60 Gy radiation) with concurrent once-per-week cetuximab for patients with SCCHN [squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck] who have high-risk pathologic features is feasible and tolerated with predictable toxicity. The radiation-docetaxel-cetuximab regimen shows particularly promising outcome with improvement in DFS and OS relative to RTOG historical controls and appears worthy of further investigation in high-risk patients with SCCHN,” concluded the authors.

Because the conclusions of this trial rely on a historical control comparison, these results need to be further validated in a phase III control-arm clinical trial. The docetaxel plus cetuximab regimen is currently being tested in a phase II/III clinical trial.

In an editorial, Amanda Psyrri, MD, PhD, and Urania Dafni, MD, both of the University of Athens in Greece, noted that, “In an era when next-generation sequencing is becoming increasingly available, identification of mutations that predict therapeutic response or resistance would be a major advance. Therefore, it seems mandatory that we focus our efforts at identifying an ‘EGFR sensitivity signature.’ Until then, it would seem wise not to conduct large phase III studies with cetuximab in unselected patient populations.”

Chemoradiation offered better survival than accelerated radiation in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas

Source: www.oncologypractice.com
Author: Neil Osterweil, Oncology Report Digital Network

Concurrent chemoradiation offered better overall survival and disease-free survival than accelerated radiotherapy in patients with moderately advanced squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck, investigators reported at the Multidisciplinary Head and Neck Symposium.

Actuarial rates of 2-year overall survival and disease-free survival in patients treated with concurrent chemoradiation (CCR) were significantly better than for patients treated with accelerated radiotherapy alone, reported Dr. Krzysztof Skladowski of the Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology in Gliwice, Poland.

“CCR with conventional 7 weeks of fractionation and at least two courses of high-dose cisplatin is more effective than 6 weeks of accelerated radiotherapy alone,” he said.

Even if patients can tolerate only a single course of cisplatin, CCR is still superior to accelerated radiation, he added.

The findings suggest that accelerated radiation protocols should be reserved for patients with more favorable prognosis, such as those with stage T2 disease with limited nodal involvement, and those who are positive for the human papillomavirus (HPV) p16 protein, Dr. Skladowski said at the symposium cosponsored by the American Society for Radiation Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The findings are “concordant with data that has been emerging now over approximately 10-14 years of the value of concurrent chemoradiation in head and neck cancer for a substantial cohort of patients over radiation alone,” said Dr. Paul Harari of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and the invited discussant.

Although a previous meta-analysis (Lancet 2006; 368:843-54) suggested that accelerated or hyperfractionated radiotherapy was associated with a 3.4% advantage in overall survival, compared with conventional radiotherapy over 5 years, there have been no randomized studies comparing accelerated radiotherapy protocols with concurrent chemoradiation in this population, Dr. Skladowski said.

He and colleagues compared the two modalities in 101 patients with moderately advanced cancers of the oropharynx (46 patients), hypopharynx (19), and larynx (36).

They defined moderately advanced cancers as stage T2N1-2, T3N0-2, or T4AN0-2 if the involved nodes are not larger than 3 cm in diameter. Patients with oropharyngeal cancers were tested for expression of the human papillomavirus (HPV) p16 protein.

Patients were randomly assigned to receive either concurrent chemoradiation with intensity-modulated radiation therapy–delivered doses of 66-70 Gy divided into 33-35 daily fractions over 45-49 days plus cisplatin 100 mg/m2, delivered on days 1, 2 and 43, or to accelerated radiotherapy delivered via intensity-modulated radiation therapy in 1.8 Gy fractions 7 days/week to a total dose of 66.2-72 Gy.

Five patients in the CCR arm received only one dose of cisplatin, 30 received two doses, and 13 received the planned three doses.

At a median follow-up of 30 months, actuarial rates of 2-year overall survival of patients treated with CCR were 81%, compared with 62% for patients treated with accelerated radiation (P = .02). Disease-free survival rates were 75% and 60%, respectively (P = .05).

Acute adverse events were similar, with approximately 80% of patients in each treatment arm experiencing confluent mucositis, and about 10% having grade 3 dysphagia. There were no grade 4 toxicities.

The majority of treatment failures in each group were local, occurring in 21 of 52 patients treated with radiation alone, and in 11 of 49 patients treated with CCR (P = .03).

Significantly more deaths occurred in the radiation alone arm: 20 vs. 9 (P =.02).

The 2-year disease-free survival rate among patients in the CCR arm was dose dependent, at 60% of patients who received one course of cisplatin, 77% of those who received two courses, and 79% for those who received all three.

At the time of the analysis, all patients with oropharyngeal cancer who were positive for HPV p16 (five treated with accelerated radiation and six with CCR) were alive with no treatment failure. The overall survival rate for HPV-positive patients was 60% in the radiation only arm, and 80% in the CCR arm.

Note:
The study was supported by the Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology. Dr. Skladowski reported having no financial disclosures. Dr. Harari has received research funding from Amgen.

March, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Study: Oropharyngeal cancer on the rise in young adults

Source: www.sciencecodex.com
Author: staff

A new study reveals an alarming increase in oropharyngeal cancers among young adults. While the exact cause for this phenomenon is unknown, the human papillomavirus (HPV) may be to blame.

According to researchers from Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit there was an overall 60 percent increase from 1973 and 2009 in cancers of the base of tongue, tonsils, soft palate and pharynx in people younger than age 45. Among Caucasians, there was a 113 percent increase, while among African-Americans the rate of these cancers declined by 52 percent during that period of time. But compared to Caucasians and other races, the five-year survival rate remains worse for African Americans.

The study is published online ahead of print in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

“The growing incidence in oropharyngeal cancer has been largely attributed to the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, which led to an increased transmission of high-risk HPV,” says study lead author Farzan Siddiqui, M.D., Ph.D., director of the Head & Neck Radiation Therapy Program in the Department of Radiation Oncology at Henry Ford Hospital.

“We were interested in looking at people born during that time period and incidence of oropharyngeal cancer. Not only were we surprised to find a substantial increase in young adults with cancer of the tonsils and base of tongue, but also a wide deviation among Caucasians and African Americans with this cancer.”

The American Cancer Society estimates about 36,000 people in the U.S. will get oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers in 2013; an estimated 6,850 people will die of these cancers. Oropharyngeal cancers are more than twice as common in men as in women, and about equally common in African Americans and Caucasians.

Recent medical research has shown that HPV exposure and infection increases the risk of oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer independently of tobacco and alcohol use, two other important risk factors for the disease, according to the National Cancer Institute. The incidence of oropharyngeal cancer has been growing in recent years due to increasing rates of HPV infection. This has been largely attributed to changes in sexual practices. Studies have shown, however, patients with HPV related head and neck cancer do have a better prognosis and survival.

For the Henry Ford study, Dr. Siddiqui and his colleagues used the SEER (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results) database to gather information about adults younger than age 45 who had been diagnosed with invasive squamous cell oropharyngeal cancer between1973 and 2009. Since SEER does not record HPV information, the researchers used tumor grade as a surrogate indicator of HPV infection.

Among the study group of more than 1,600 patients, 90 percent were ages 36-44 and the majority (73 percent) was Caucasian. During the 36-year period, the majority of patients (50-65 percent) underwent surgical resection for their tumors. Patients who had both surgery and radiation therapy had the highest five-year survival rate.

“These patients have a favorable prognosis and are likely to live longer while dealing with treatment related side-effects that may impact their quality of life,” notes Dr. Siddiqui.

The five-year survival for the study group was 54 percent. There was no difference in survival based on gender. African Americans, however, had significantly poor survival compared to other races.

“The predominance of oropharyngeal cancer in this age group suggests either non-sexual modes of HPV transfer at a younger age or a shortened latency period between infection and development of cancer,” says Dr. Siddiqui.

Source: Henry Ford Health System

January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Certain genetic alterations may explain head and neck cancer survival disparities

Source: www.sciencecodex.com
Author: staff

Certain genetic alterations to the PAX gene family may be responsible for survival disparities seen between African-American and non-Latino white men with head and neck cancer, according to results presented here at the Sixth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved, held Dec. 6-9.

“During the last 30 years, the overall five-year relative survival rates for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have increased, but despite that, the gap in overall survival rates between non-Latino white patients and African-American patients has remained unchanged,” said Rafael Guerrero-Preston, Dr.P.H., assistant professor at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Md. “This disparity may be due to differences in genetic and epigenetic alterations among African-American patients.”

To test this theory, Guerrero-Preston and colleagues performed a two-stage epigenomic study. In the stage-one discovery phase, the researchers used next-generation sequencing and array-based technologies to evaluate 107 HNSCC samples. In the stage-two validation phase, they validated the findings of the discovery phase and evaluated their effect on survival rates in 279 patient samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas project.

“Our results highlight the differential genomic and epigenomic alterations in PAX, NOTCH, and TP53 pathways between African-American and non-Latino white HNSCC patients, which underlie the complex biology of morphologically similar tumors and explain HNSCC survival disparities,” Guerrero-Preston said. “If further validated in larger cohorts, these discoveries could be used to develop genomic and epigenomic panels that will enable more treatment options, a reduction in treatment cost, and improvement in survival rates for patients with HNSCC.”

The researchers found that African-American HNSCC patients had higher frequencies of p53, FBXW7, and NOTCH1 mutations and no differences in PAX1 or PAX5 methylation across all tumor sites combined. However, when they looked at data based on each tumor site, some differences were discovered.

African-American patients with HNSCC had higher ZIC4, PLCB1, and PAX5 promoter methylation and p53 mutations compared with non-Latino white patients. African-American patients also had no NOTCH1 mutations in nonoropharynx HNSCC. However, in the oropharynx, African-American patients had a higher frequency of combined NOTCH1 mutations and PAX1 methylation.

In contrast, non-Latino white patients with HNSCC had a higher frequency of PAX5 promoter methylation and combined p53 mutation or PAX5 methylation in the oropharynx compared with African-American patients.

All patients with greater PAX5 methylation and p53 mutations had worse overall survival, the researchers found.

Source: American Association for Cancer Research

December, 2013|Oral Cancer News|