oropharyngeal cancer

Lowering Radiation Dose Could Improve QoL, Cut Costs in Oral Ca

Source: MedPage Today, Medpage.com Date: October 25th, 2018 Author: Elizabeth Hlavinka SAN ANTONIO -- Radiation de-intensification was tied to a quicker rebound in a number of quality of life (QoL) measures and reduced costs for patients with HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer, a pair of studies found. With lower doses of radiotherapy (RT), QoL measures including speech, pain, and socialization still generally worsened after treatment, but returned to baseline within 3 to 6 months, reported Kevin Pearlstein, MD, of the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. And more aggressive de-intensification led to a 22% cost reduction for treatment overall ($45,884 versus $57,845 with standard care), with 33% lower costs for RT itself and 50% lower costs for post-treatment care (P=0.01), according to findings presented by Mark Waddle, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. The studies were presented here at the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) meeting during a session on improving outcomes while minimizing toxicity in oropharyngeal cancer. In the research from Pearlstein's group, patients reported global QoL scores of 81 at baseline (using the 100-point EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, where higher scores connote better health), which dipped to 69 at 3 months post-treatment, then rose to 75 at 6 months. Global QoL scores increased to 82 and 84 by months 12 and 24, respectively. Common long-term side effects such as sticky saliva, taste, and ability to swallow did not return to baseline within months 3 to 6, but continued to improve between months 12 and 24. Pearlstein noted [...]

Charlotte Parker2018-10-25T15:18:41-07:00October, 2018|Oral Cancer News|

HPV Vaccination Linked to Decreased Oral HPV Infections

Author: NCI Staff Date: June 5th, 2017 Source: www.cancer.org New study results suggest that vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV) may sharply reduce oral HPV infections that are a major risk factor for oropharyngeal cancer, a type of head and neck cancer. The study of more than 2,600 young adults in the United States found that the prevalence of oral infection with four HPV types, including two high-risk, or cancer-causing, types, was 88% lower in those who reported receiving at least one dose of an HPV vaccine than in those who said they were not vaccinated. About 70% of oropharyngeal cancers are caused by high-risk HPV infection, and the incidence of HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer has been increasing in the United States in recent decades. In the United States, more than half of oropharyngeal cancers are linked to a single high-risk HPV type, HPV 16, which is one of the types covered by Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved HPV vaccines. “In an unvaccinated population, we would estimate that about a million young adults would have an oral HPV infection by one of these vaccine HPV types. If they had all been vaccinated, we could have prevented almost 900,000 of those infections,” said senior study author Maura Gillison, M.D., Ph.D., of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Dr. Gillison presented the new findings at a May 17 press briefing ahead of the 2017 annual American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meeting, held June 2–6 in Chicago. A Rapidly Rising Cancer Oropharyngeal [...]

Charlotte Parker2017-06-05T14:39:41-07:00June, 2017|Oral Cancer News|

Smokeless Tobacco Use and the Risk of Head and Neck Cancer: Pooled Analysis of US Studies in the INHANCE Consortium.

Source: www.pubmed.gov Author: Wyss AB, Gillison ML, Olshan AF Abstract Previous studies on smokeless tobacco use and head and neck cancer (HNC) have found inconsistent and often imprecise estimates, with limited control for cigarette smoking. Using pooled data from 11 US case-control studies (1981-2006) of oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal cancers (6,772 cases and 8,375 controls) in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology (INHANCE) Consortium, we applied hierarchical logistic regression to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for ever use, frequency of use, and duration of use of snuff and chewing tobacco separately for never and ever cigarette smokers. Ever use (versus never use) of snuff was strongly associated with HNC among never cigarette smokers (odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08, 2.70), particularly for oral cavity cancers (OR = 3.01, 95% CI: 1.63, 5.55). Although ever (versus never) tobacco chewing was weakly associated with HNC among never cigarette smokers (OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 0.81, 1.77), analyses restricted to cancers of the oral cavity showed a stronger association (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.04, 3.17). Few or no associations between each type of smokeless tobacco and HNC were observed among ever cigarette smokers, possibly reflecting residual confounding by smoking. Smokeless tobacco use appears to be associated with HNC, especially oral cancers, with snuff being more strongly associated than chewing tobacco. © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. *This news story [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-10-31T14:31:13-07:00October, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

America’s Most Popular ‘Legal’ Drug is Responsible for 25% of ALL Cancer

Source: www.thefreethoughtproject.com Author: John Vibes There are many factors contributing to the massive rise in cancer cases in the US, but according to a new study from the American Cancer Society, cigarette smoke is by far the leading cause. The study found that roughly 25% of all cancer deaths could be attributed to cigarette smoking. Although cigarette smoking has waned somewhat in recent years, nearly 40 million adults in the U.S. currently smoke cigarettes. The CDC says cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the U.S., responsible for more than 480,000 deaths annually. According to the study: We estimate that at least 167 133 cancer deaths in the United States in 2014 (28.6% of all cancer deaths; 95% CI, 28.2%-28.8%) were attributable to cigarette smoking. Among men, the proportion of cancer deaths attributable to smoking ranged from a low of 21.8% in Utah (95% CI, 19.9%-23.5%) to a high of 39.5% in Arkansas (95% CI, 36.9%-41.7%), but was at least 30% in every state except Utah. Among women, the proportion ranged from 11.1% in Utah (95% CI, 9.6%-12.3%) to 29.0% in Kentucky (95% CI, 27.2%-30.7%) and was at least 20% in all states except Utah, California, and Hawaii. Nine of the top 10 ranked states for men and 6 of the top 10 ranked states for women were located in the South. In men, smoking explained nearly 40% of cancer deaths in the top 5 ranked states (Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Kentucky). In women, [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-10-31T12:31:03-07:00October, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Can your own immune system kill cancer?

Source: www.cnn.com Author: Jacqueline Howard There was another big win in the advancement of immunotherapy treatments for cancer this week. The Food and Drug Administration approved an immunotherapy drug called Keytruda, which stimulates the body's immune system, for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. In other words, the drug could be the very first treatment a patient receives for the disease, instead of chemotherapy. Keytruda is the only immunotherapy drug approved for first-line treatment for these patients. So it seems, the future of cancer care may be in our own immune systems, but how exactly does it work, and what are its pros and cons? "It's certainly going to become an independent way of treating cancers," said Dr. Philip Greenberg, head of immunology at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, during a Q&A session at the International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference in New York in September. "We always talk about the three pillars of cancer therapy -- radiation therapy, chemotherapy and surgery -- and it's become quite clear now that there's going to be a fourth pillar, which is immunotherapy," he said. "There are times where it will be used alone, and there will be times that it will be used in conjunction with the other therapies, but there's very little to question that this is going to be a major part of the way cancers are treated from now on, going forward." Here's a look at the past, present and future of cancer immunotherapy. It [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-10-26T09:42:45-07:00October, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

This Is Why Your Drug Prescriptions Cost So Damn Much

Source: www.motherjones.com Author: Stuart Silverstein When the Republican-controlled Congress approved a landmark program in 2003 to help seniors buy prescription drugs, it slapped on an unusual restriction: The federal government was barred from negotiating cheaper prices for those medicines. Instead, the job of holding down costs was outsourced to the insurance companies delivering the subsidized new coverage, known as Medicare Part D. The ban on government price bargaining, justified by supporters on free-market grounds, has been derided by critics as a giant gift to the drug industry. Democratic lawmakers began introducing bills to free the government to use its vast purchasing power to negotiate better deals even before former President George W. Bush signed the Part D law, known as the Medicare Modernization Act. All those measures over the last 13 years have failed, almost always without ever even getting a hearing, much less being brought up for a vote. That's happened even though surveys have shown broad public support for the idea. For example, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll found last year that 93 percent of Democrats and 74 percent of Republicans favor letting the government negotiate Part D prescription drug prices. "I mean, how in the world can one explain that the government actually passed a law saying that you can't negotiate prices?" It seems an anomaly in a democracy that an idea that is immensely popular—and calculated to save money for seniors, people with disabilities, and taxpayers—gets no traction. But critics say it's no mystery, given the [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-10-21T11:17:17-07:00October, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Expert Asserts Pembrolizumab to Play Important Role in Head and Neck Cancer Treatment

Source: www.targetedonc.com Author: Laura Panjwani The FDA approval of pembrolizumab (Keytruda) as a treatment for patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in August 2016 was extremely significant for this patient population, which previously had limited options following progression on a platinum-based chemotherapy. The approval was based on the phase Ib KEYNOTE-012 study, which demonstrated that pembrolizumab had an overall response rate (ORR) of 18% and a stable disease rate of 17% in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. Several other studies are further evaluating the immunotherapy agent in HNSCC.Preliminary results of the phase II KEYNOTE-055 study—which included 92 evaluable patients who received pembrolizumab after failing platinum and cetuximab therapies—were presented at the 2016 ASCO Annual Meeting. In an interview with Targeted Oncology, lead study author Joshua M. Bauml, MD, an assistant professor of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and the Veteran's Administration Medical Center, discusses the impact of pembrolizumab’s success in HNSCC, the results of the KEYNOTE-055 study, and what he sees on the horizon for the PD-1 inhibitor in this field. TARGETED ONCOLOGY: What role do you envision pembrolizumab having in this patient population? Baumi: It is going to play a critical role in head and neck cancer. The other agents that are available have limited efficacy, and are associated with significant toxicities. This is a clear improvement for our patient population with limited options. TARGETED ONCOLOGY: What were the key takeaways from KEYNOTE-055? Baumi: Patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer that [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-09-22T14:29:26-07:00September, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Expert says Nivolumab Poised to Change Standard of Care in SCCHN

Source: www.onclive.com Author: Laura Panjwani 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 [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-08-24T13:28:58-07:00August, 2016|Oral Cancer News|

Henry Schein Donates Medical Supplies In Support of Free Oral Cancer Screening Events throughout the United States

Source: www.mysocialgoodnews.com Author: Api Potter Company’s Donation to Support 77 Screening Events in 2016 and 2017 by the Oral Cancer Foundation Press Release – MELVILLE, N.Y., July 25, 2016 – Henry Schein, Inc. (Nasdaq: HSIC) announced today that it is donating more than $10,000 in medical supplies to the Oral Cancer Foundation (OCF) in support of 77 free oral cancer screening events being held throughout the United States in 2016 and 2017. Each OCF-hosted event aims to boost awareness of the disease and increase early detection. The Company’s donation of gauze, tongue depressors, and disposable dental mirrors, facemasks, and gloves is an initiative of Henry Schein Cares, the Company’s global corporate social responsibility program, and continues the Company’s support of OCF’s screening events. OCF hosts the events in a range of locations, including pharmacy parking lots, health fairs, farmer’s markets, colleges, and OCF Walk/Run for Awareness events. “The health of our mouths greatly impacts our ability to eat and drink, communicate thoughts and ideas, and express feelings for loved ones,” said Brian Hill, Founder of the Oral Cancer Foundation. “When cancer affects our mouths, it does more than take away these everyday functions, it too often takes our lives. Our screening events are designed to identify signs of oral cancer before it ever gets that far, and we thank Henry Schein for this generous donation and its continued support of oral cancer awareness and early detection efforts.” The donation comes at a time when nearly 500,000 people worldwide are diagnosed annually [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-07-27T12:17:07-07:00July, 2016|OCF In The News, Oral Cancer News|

Knowledgeability, Attitude and Behavior of Primary Care Providers Towards Oral Cancer: a Pilot Study

Source: www.link.springer.com Authors: Neel Shimpi, Aditi Bharatkumar, Monica Jethwani, Po-Huang Cyou, Ingrid Glurich, Jake Blamer, Amit Acharya The objective of this study was to assess current knowledgeability, attitudes, and practice behaviors of primary care providers (PCPs) towards oral cancer screening. Applying a cross-sectional design, a 14-question survey was emailed to 307 PCPs practicing at a large, multi-specialty, rurally based healthcare system. Survey data were collected and managed using REDCap and analyzed applying descriptive statistics. A 20 % response rate (n = 61/307) was achieved for survey completion. Approximately 70 % of respondents were physicians, 16 % were nurse practitioners, and 13 % were physician assistants. Nearly 60 % of respondents were family medicine practitioners. Limited training surrounding oral cancer screening during medical training was reported by 64 %. Although 78 % of respondents reported never performing oral cancer screening on patients in their practice, >90 % answered knowledge-based questions correctly. Frequency rate for specialist referral for suspicious lesions by PCPs was 56 % “frequently”. Optimal periodicity for oral cancer screening on all patients selected by respondents was 61 % “annually”, 3 % “every 6 months”, 3 % “every visit”, 2 % “not at all”, and 31 % “unsure”. This study established a baseline surrounding current knowledgeability, practice patterns, and opinions of PCPs towards oral cancer screening at a single, large, regional healthcare system. In the absence of evidence-based support for population-based cancer screening, this study result suggests a need for better integration of oral cancer surveillance into the medical setting, supplemented by education and training with emphasis on assessment of high-risk patients to achieve early detection. [...]

Charlotte Parker2016-07-25T10:18:19-07:00July, 2016|Oral Cancer News|