Fig. 7.1
MRI (a) axial and coronal images and PET-CT (b) display an oropharyngeal left palatine tonsillar tumor extending superiorly to left anterior tonsillar pillar, anterior inferiorly to base of tongue, and inferiorly to left aryepiglottic plica which is narrowing glossopharyngeal recess and oro/hypopharyngeal airway
2 Evidence-Based Treatment Approaches
Single modality radiotherapy or primary surgery (transoral or open resection) for stage T1-2 N0-1 has been preferred with similar rates of local control and survival, as no prospective randomized comparison is present [1–3]. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is mostly the key treatment for locally advanced stages III and IVA/B cancers without distant metastases (Table 7.1) [4–11], while the resectability and neck nodal disease volume are denominators in decision making to perform initially surgery for primary (T3–T4a) and neck (N0-1) and to consolidate with radiotherapy (close resection margins, lymphovascular and perineural invasion , pT3-T4, N2 or N3, nodal disease levels IV–V) or chemoradiotherapy (positive surgical margins and/or nodal extracapsular invasion) metastases (Table 7.2) [12–15]. Induction chemotherapy followed by radio/chemoradiotherapy is yet a category three approach which might be considered in heavy nodal volume with an increased risk of distant metastases [5, 6, 16–19]. Cetuximab as a single agent concurrent with radiotherapy for treatment of locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer seemed to improve locoregional control and to reduce mortality, while the addition of cetuximab to the chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin did not improve progression-free or overall survival [20].
Table 7.1
Large, randomized phase III trials of concurrent chemoradiation
Trial | Year | N | RT | Schedule | Concomitant CT | DFS or PFS | OS | Conclusion | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Standard | Comparison | RT | CRT | RT | CRT | |||||
French [4] GORTEC 94-01 | 2004 | 226 | 70 Gy; 2 Gy/fraction | 70 Gy; 2 Gy/fraction | 3 cycles of carboplatin + 5FU | 14.6 | 26.6 | 15.8 | 22.4 | Chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival and locoregional control |
Swiss [8] SAKK | 2004 | 224 | 74.4 Gy; 1.2 Gy/fraction twice daily | 74.4 Gy; 1.2 Gy/fraction twice daily | 2 cycles of cisplatin | – | – | 32 | 46 | Therapeutic index of radiotherapy is enhanced by concurrent cisplatin |
German [9] 95-06 | 2005 | 384 | 30 Gy; 2 Gy/fraction + 40.6 Gy; 1.4 Gy/fraction twice daily to a total of 70.6 Gy | 14 Gy; 2 Gy/fraction + 63.6 Gy; 1.4 Gy/fraction twice daily to a total of 77.6 Gy | 5FU + mitomycin | 26.6 | 29.3 | 23.7 | 28.6 | C-HART (70.6 Gy) is superior to dose-escalated HART (77.6 Gy) |
FNCLCC/GORTEC [10] | 2006 | 163 | 80.4 Gy; 1.2 Gy/fraction twice daily, 5 days per week | 80.4 Gy; 1.2 Gy/fraction twice daily, 5 days per week | 3 cycles of Cisplatin + 5FU | 25.2 (2 y) | 48.2 (2 y) | 20.1 (2 y) | 37.8 (2 y) | Chemoradiotherapy reveals better outcome than radiotherapy alone, even with an aggressive dose-intense schedule |
RTOG 0129 [11] | 2010 | 743 | 70 Gy; 2 Gy/fraction | 72 Gy; 42 fractions over 6 weeks | 2–3 cycles of cisplatin | – | – | 59 | 56 | Standard of care for these patients remains concurrent chemoradiotherapy with standard fractionation. |
Table 7.2
Two concurrent postoperative radiation plus chemotherapy trials
Trial | EORTC 22931 [12] | ||
---|---|---|---|
# patients | 416 | 334 | |
Median follow-up, months | 45.9 (120) | 60 | |
% oropharyngeal cancer | 43 | 30 | |
Radiotherapy alone | 60 Gy in 6 weeks | 66 Gy in 6.5 weeks | |
Chemoradiotherapy | 60 Gy in 6 weeks plus cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 22, and 43 | 66 Gy in 6.5 weeks plus cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 22, and 43 | |
Inclusion criteria | Positive resection margin | + (6 % of patients) | + (13 % of patients) |
Extracapsular extension | + (49 % of patients) | + (41 % of patients) | |
≥2 nodes involved | + | − | |
Perineural involvement | − | + | |
Vascular tumor embolism | − | + | |
Oral cavity or oropharyngeal tumor with involvement of level IV or V lymph nodes | − | + | |
Overall survival | Radiotherapy alone | 47 % (27 %) | 40 % |
Chemoradiotherapy | 56 % (29 %) | 53 % | |
Local-regional recurrence | Radiotherapy alone | 33 % (28.8 %) | 31 % |
Chemoradiotherapy | 22 % (22.3 %) | 18 % | |
Disease free survival | Radiotherapy alone | 36 % (19.1 %) | 36 % |
Chemoradiotherapy | 47 % (20.1 %) | 47 % | |
Conclusion [13] | Subgroup of patients with either microscopically involved resection margins and/or extracapsular spread showed improved local-regional control and disease-free survival by concurrent chemoradiotherapy |
It has become evident as one of the most significant recent advances that HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer (HPVOPC) should be considered as a different entity from HPV-negative cancers [21]. HPVOPC is frequently presenting with a smaller primary tumor and more advanced cervical lymph node disease which is having a cystic appearance [22–24].
Oropharyngeal cancer has been recommended to be classified as having a low (HPV+, ≤10 pack-year smoking or >10 pack-year and N0–N2a), intermediate (HPV+, >10 pack-year smoking and N2b–N3 or HPV-, ≤10 pack-year smoking, T2–3), or high risk (HPV-, ≤10 pack-year smoking, T4 or HPV-, >10 pack-year smoking) of death on the basis of four factors [25, 26]. However, as the results of ongoing trials for metastases (Table 7.3) are incomplete, current recommendation should be treatment regardless of the HPV status according to the stage of disease at presentation.
Table 7.3
Ongoing phase 3 randomized trials in HPV-positive or HPV-negative oropharyngeal cancer patients
Trial | HPV status | Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria | Treatment |
---|---|---|---|---|
EORTC-1219 | (−) | Oropharynx/larynx/hypopharynx primary tumor, stage III or IV (M0) | – | Accelerated 70 Gy in 6 weeks RT plus cisplatin vs accelerated |
RT plus cisplatin plus nimorazole | ||||
RTOG-1016 | (+) | T1–2,N2a–N3 or T3–4,any N | – | Accelerated 70 Gy IMRT plus high-dose cisplatin vs accelerated IMRT plus cetuximab |
TROG 12.01 | (+) | Stage III (excluding T1–2 N1) or IV if ≤10 pack-year smoking history | T4, N3, or M1 | RT plus weekly cetuximab vs RT plus weekly cisplatin |
If >10 pack-year smoking history, only N0–N2a | ||||
The Quarterback Trial | (+) | Oropharynx/unknown primary/nasopharynx, stage III or IV disease (M0), | Active smokers or smoking >20 pack-year | Responders of 3 cycles of induction TPF randomized to 70 Gy RT plus weekly carbo-platin vs RT (56 Gy) plus weekly carboplatin plus cetuximab |
De-ESCALaTE | (+) | Stage III–Iva (T3N0–T4N0, and T1N1–T4N3) | >10 pack-year excluded | RT plus high-dose cisplatin vs RT plus cetuximab |
≥N2b disease and smoking history | ||||
ADEPT | (+) | Transoral resection (R0 margin) | – | 60 Gy IMRT in 6 weeks vs IMRT plus cisplatin |
T1–4a, pN-positive with extracapsular spread |
3 Target Volume Determination and Delineation Guidelines
Oropharynx is shaped with following structures: palatoglossal arch, pharyngeal tonsil, tonsillar fossa, tonsillar pillar, palatopharyngeal arch, base of the tongue, epiglottic vallecula , posterior wall of the oropharynx, and oral surface of the soft palate, uvula. The most common locations for a primary tumor of the oropharynx are anterior tonsillar pillar and tonsil. Primary lymphatic drainage is the retropharyngeal, level II and III nodes.
Gross Tumor Volume (GTV)
GTV should include the gross disease at the primary disease site or any grossly involved lymph nodes (>1 cm or nodes with a necrotic center or PET positive) which are determined from CT, MRI, PET-CT, clinical information, and endoscopic findings [27]. The GTV can be subdivided as the primary site (GTVp) and involved gross lymph nodes (GTVn). A thorough contouring is required for GTVp based on the exact spreading pattern which can be questioned as follows given two major sites, base of tongue and tonsil:
Anteriorly:
Is lingual surface of epiglottis involved (T3 for tonsil primary, T does not change for base of tongue or vallecula primary)?
Is retromolar trigone involved?
Is buccal mucosa involved (drainage to buccal nodes)?
Is anterior tonsillar pillar involved?
Is tonsillar fossa involved (lymphatic drainage is primarily to level V nodes)?
Is oral tongue involved (IA drainage, T stage does not change; intrinsic muscles – no bony attachment)?
Is the mandible involved (T4a)?
Laterally:
Is the medial (T4a) or lateral pterygoid (T4b) muscles infiltrated (trismus clinically)?
Is the retrostyloid compartment intact (the carotid space to cranial nerves IX, X, XI, and XII)?
Is the jugular foramen intact (gateway to posterior cranial fossa and IX, X, and XI cranial nerves at risk)?
Posteriorly:
Is posterior tonsillar pillar involved (possible inferior extension to the pharyngoepiglottic fold and posterior aspect of the thyroid cartilage; more frequent involvement for level V nodes)?
Is the prevertebral fascia infiltrated?
Inferiorly:
Is the floor of the mouth involved (T4a; extrinsic muscles – with bony attachment as hyo/genio/palato/styloglossus; mylohyoid muscle which separates sublingual and submandibular space)?
Is the larynx involved?
Is the pyriform sinus involved?
Is the hypopharyngeal wall involved?
Superiorly:
Is the soft palate involved?
Is hard palate involved (T4a)?
Clinical Target Volume (CTV)
There needs to be three CTV volumes based on risk definitions while respecting anatomical barriers (air, muscle, skin, bone, etc.) to microscopic spread.
CTV 1, covering GTVp and GTVn with a margin of ≥ 5 mm (as low as 1 mm in close proximity to critical structures: chiasm, brain stem, etc.) given circumferentially around the GTV.< div class='tao-gold-member'>Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register a > to continue