Devraj Srinivasan

BACKGROUND: The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal cancer, a disease affecting younger patients, is rapidly increasing. Cetuximab, an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, has been proposed for treatment de-escalation in this setting to reduce the toxicity of standard cisplatin treatment, but no randomised evidence exists for the efficacy of this strategy. METHODS: ). The primary outcome was overall severe (grade 3-5) toxicity events at 24 months from the end of treatment. The primary outcome was assessed by intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN33522080. FINDINGS: Between Nov 12, 2012, and Oct 1, 2016, 334 patients were recruited (166 in the cisplatin group and 168 in the cetuximab group). Overall (acute and late) severe (grade 3-5) toxicity did not differ significantly between treatment groups at 24 months (mean number of events per patient 4·8 [95% CI 4·2-5·4] with cisplatin vs 4·8 [4·2-5·4] with cetuximab; p=0·98). At 24 months, overall all-grade toxicity did not differ significantly either (mean number of events per patient 29·2 [95% CI 27·3-31·0] with cisplatin vs 30·1 [28·3-31·9] with cetuximab; p=0·49). However, there was a significant difference between cisplatin and cetuximab in 2-year overall survival (97·5% vs 89·4%, hazard ratio 5·0 [95% CI 1·7-14·7]; p=0·001) and 2-year recurrence (6·0% vs 16·1%, 3·4 [1·6-7·2]; p=0·0007). INTERPRETATION: Compared with the standard cisplatin regimen, cetuximab showed no benefit in terms of reduced toxicity, but instead showed significant detriment in terms of tumour control. Cisplatin and radiotherapy should be used as the standard of care for HPV-positive low-risk patients who are able to tolerate cisplatin. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

BACKGROUND: Most newly diagnosed oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers are treated with chemoradiotherapy with curative intent but at the consequence of adverse effects on quality of life. We aimed to investigate if dysphagia-optimised intensity-modulated radiotherapy (DO-IMRT) reduced radiation dose to the dysphagia and aspiration related structures and improved swallowing function compared with standard IMRT. METHODS: DARS was a parallel-group, phase 3, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial done in 22 radiotherapy centres in Ireland and the UK. Participants were aged 18 years and older, had T1-4, N0-3, M0 oropharyngeal or hypopharyngeal cancer, a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and no pre-existing swallowing dysfunction. Participants were centrally randomly assigned (1:1) using a minimisation algorithm (balancing factors: centre, chemotherapy use, tumour type, American Joint Committee on Cancer tumour stage) to receive DO-IMRT or standard IMRT. Participants and speech language therapists were masked to treatment allocation. Radiotherapy was given in 30 fractions over 6 weeks. Dose was 65 Gy to primary and nodal tumour and 54 Gy to remaining pharyngeal subsite and nodal areas at risk of microscopic disease. For DO-IMRT, the volume of the superior and middle pharyngeal constrictor muscle or inferior pharyngeal constrictor muscle lying outside the high-dose target volume had a mandatory 50 Gy mean dose constraint. The primary endpoint was MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) composite score 12 months after radiotherapy, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population that included only patients who completed a 12-month assessment; safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one fraction of radiotherapy. The study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN25458988, and is complete. FINDINGS: From June 24, 2016, to April 27, 2018, 118 patients were registered, 112 of whom were randomly assigned (56 to each treatment group). 22 (20%) participants were female and 90 (80%) were male; median age was 57 years (IQR 52-62). Median follow-up was 39·5 months (IQR 37·8-50·0). Patients in the DO-IMRT group had significantly higher MDADI composite scores at 12 months than patients in the standard IMRT group (mean score 77·7 [SD 16·1] vs 70·6 [17·3]; mean difference 7·2 [95% CI 0·4-13·9]; p=0·037). 25 serious adverse events (16 serious adverse events assessed as unrelated to study treatment [nine in the DO-IMRT group and seven in the standard IMRT group] and nine serious adverse reactions [two vs seven]) were reported in 23 patients. The most common grade 3-4 late adverse events were hearing impairment (nine [16%] of 55 in the DO-IMRT group vs seven [13%] of 55 in the standard IMRT group), dry mouth (three [5%] vs eight [15%]), and dysphagia (three [5%] vs eight [15%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that DO-IMRT improves patient-reported swallowing function compared with standard IMRT. DO-IMRT should be considered a new standard of care for patients receiving radiotherapy for pharyngeal cancers. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

A 73-year-old female presenting with haemoptysis and dyspnoea was found to have a locally advanced left thyroid mass and vocal cord palsy. A CT scan of the neck and thorax and endoscopy demonstrated invasion into the tracheal lumen. Histopathology of the intraluminal tracheal mass confirmed a papillary thyroid cancer (PTC). The tumour was deemed unresectable due to local extent and patient comorbidities. TKI therapy with lenvatinib was used for 14 months. On serial scanning, a marked reduction in tumour volume from 31 × 59 × 32 mm to 17 × 28 × 22 mm was noted. This subsequently allowed a successful surgical resection with a total thyroidectomy and central neck dissection with no evidence of residual macroscopic disease. Histopathology confirmed a well-differentiated PTC with features of tumour regression. In this case, TKI therapy in a locally advanced unresectable DTC reduced tumour size and infiltration to a degree that surgical resection of macroscopic disease was possible, without requiring airway resection. This raises the possibility that TKIs may have a neoadjuvant role in selected cases of locally advanced DTC to reduce tumour volume and therefore morbidity of subsequent surgical resection.

6508 Background: Most newly diagnosed oro- & hypopharngeal cancers (OPC, HPC) are treated with (chemo)RT with curative intent but at the consequence of adverse effects on quality of life. CRUK/14/014 investigated if using Do-IMRT to reduce RT dose to the dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS) improved swallowing function compared to S-IMRT. Methods: Patients with T1-4, N0-3, M0 OPC/HPC were randomised 1:1 to S-IMRT (65 Gray (Gy)/30 fractions (f) to primary & nodal tumour; 54Gy/30f to remaining pharyngeal subsite & nodal areas at risk of microscopic disease) or Do-IMRT. The volume of the superior & middle pharyngeal constrictor muscle (PCM) (OPC) or inferior PCM (HPC) lying outside the high-dose target volume was set a mandatory mean dose constraint in Do-IMRT. Treatment allocation was by minimisation balanced by centre, use of induction/concomitant chemotherapy, tumour site & AJCC stage. Primary endpoint was mean MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) composite score 12 months after RT with 102 patients needed to detect a 10 point improvement (assuming S-IMRT score of 72, standard deviation (SD) 13.8; 90% power, 2-sided 5% alpha). Patients were blind to treatment allocation. Secondary endpoints included local control. Results: 112 patients (56 S-IMRT, 56 Do-IMRT) were randomised from 22 UK centres from 06/2016 to 04/2018. Mean age was 57 years; 80% were male; 97% had OPC; 90% had AJCC stage 3&4 disease; 86% had concomitant chemotherapy only, 4% induction & concomitant and 10% no chemotherapy. 111/112 had RT doses as prescribed (1 patient died before RT). Median of the mean inferior PCM dose was S-IMRT 49.8Gy (IQR 47.1-52.4) vs. Do-IMRT 28.4Gy (21.3–37.4), p < 0.0001; superior & middle PCM dose was S-IMRT 57.2Gy (56.3–58.3) vs. Do-IMRT 49.7Gy (49.4–49.9), p < 0.0001. Do-IMRT had significantly higher MDADI scores: S-IMRT 70.3 (SD 17.3) vs. Do-IMRT 77.7 (16.1), p = 0.016. 3 local recurrences (1 S-IMRT, 2 Do-IMRT) have been reported. Conclusions: Do-IMRT reduced RT dose to the DARS and improved patient reported swallowing function compared with S-IMRT. This is the first randomised study to demonstrate functional benefit of swallow-sparing IMRT in OPC. Clinical trial information: 25458988 .