Christopher M. Nutting

Parotid-sparing intensity modulated versus conventional radiotherapy in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT): a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial

Summary Background Xerostomia is the most common late side-effect of radiotherapy to the head and neck. Compared with conventional radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can reduce irradiation of the parotid glands. We assessed the hypothesis that parotid-sparing IMRT reduces the incidence of severe xerostomia. Methods We undertook a randomised controlled trial between Jan 21, 2003, and Dec 7, 2007, that compared conventional radiotherapy (control) with parotid-sparing IMRT. We randomly assigned patients with histologically confirmed pharyngeal squamous-cell carcinoma (T1–4, N0–3, M0) at six UK radiotherapy centres between the two radiotherapy techniques (1:1 ratio). A dose of 60 or 65 Gy was prescribed in 30 daily fractions given Monday to Friday. Treatment was not masked. Randomisation was by computer-generated permuted blocks and was stratified by centre and tumour site. Our primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with grade 2 or worse xerostomia at 12 months, as assessed by the Late Effects of Normal Tissue (LENT SOMA) scale. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis, with all patients who had assessments included. Long-term follow-up of patients is ongoing. This study is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial register, number ISRCTN48243537. Findings 47 patients were assigned to each treatment arm. Median follow-up was 44·0 months (IQR 30·0–59·7). Six patients from each group died before 12 months and seven patients from the conventional radiotherapy and two from the IMRT group were not assessed at 12 months. At 12 months xerostomia side-effects were reported in 73 of 82 alive patients; grade 2 or worse xerostomia at 12 months was significantly lower in the IMRT group than in the conventional radiotherapy group (25 [74%; 95% CI 56–87] of 34 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs 15 [38%; 23–55] of 39 given IMRT, p=0·0027). The only recorded acute adverse event of grade 2 or worse that differed significantly between the treatment groups was fatigue, which was more prevalent in the IMRT group (18 [41%; 99% CI 23–61] of 44 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs 35 [74%; 55–89] of 47 given IMRT, p=0·0015). At 24 months, grade 2 or worse xerostomia was significantly less common with IMRT than with conventional radiotherapy (20 [83%; 95% CI 63–95] of 24 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs nine [29%; 14–48] of 31 given IMRT; p<0·0001). At 12 and 24 months, significant benefits were seen in recovery of saliva secretion with IMRT compared with conventional radiotherapy, as were clinically significant improvements in dry-mouth-specific and global quality of life scores. At 24 months, no significant differences were seen between randomised groups in non-xerostomia late toxicities, locoregional control, or overall survival. Interpretation Sparing the parotid glands with IMRT significantly reduces the incidence of xerostomia and leads to recovery of saliva secretion and improvements in associated quality of life, and thus strongly supports a role for IMRT in squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Funding Cancer Research UK (CRUK/03/005).

Sorafenib in radioactive iodine-refractory, locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Patients with radioactive iodine ((131)I)-refractory locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer have a poor prognosis because of the absence of effective treatment options. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of orally administered sorafenib in the treatment of patients with this type of cancer. METHODS In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (DECISION), we investigated sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) in patients with radioactive iodine-refractory locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer that had progressed within the past 14 months. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with this type of cancer were enrolled from 77 centres in 18 countries. To be eligible for inclusion, participants had to have at least one measurable lesion by CT or MRI according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST); Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2; adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function; and serum thyroid-stimulating hormone concentration lower than 0·5 mIU/L. An interactive voice response system was used to randomly allocate participants in a 1:1 ratio to either sorafenib or matching placebo. Patients, investigators, and the study sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed every 8 weeks by central independent review. Analysis was by intention to treat. Patients in the placebo group could cross over to open-label sorafenib upon disease progression. Archival tumour tissue was examined for BRAF and RAS mutations, and serum thyroglobulin was measured at baseline and at each visit. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00984282, and with the EU Clinical Trials Register, number EudraCT 2009-012007-25. FINDINGS Patients were randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to sorafenib or placebo. The intention-to-treat population comprised 417 patients (207 in the sorafenib group and 210 in the placebo group) and the safety population was 416 patients (207 in the sorafenib group and 209 in the placebo group). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the sorafenib group (10·8 months) than in the placebo group (5·8 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·59, 95% CI 0·45-0·76; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival improved in all prespecified clinical and genetic biomarker subgroups, irrespective of mutation status. Adverse events occurred in 204 of 207 (98·6%) patients receiving sorafenib during the double-blind period and in 183 of 209 (87·6%) patients receiving placebo. Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events in the sorafenib group were hand-foot skin reaction (76·3%), diarrhoea (68·6%), alopecia (67·1%), and rash or desquamation (50·2%). INTERPRETATION Sorafenib significantly improved progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients with progressive radioactive iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of sorafenib. These results suggest that sorafenib is a new treatment option for patients with progressive radioactive iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer. FUNDING Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Onyx Pharmaceuticals (an Amgen subsidiary).

Ablation with Low-Dose Radioiodine and Thyrotropin Alfa in Thyroid Cancer

BACKGROUND It is not known whether low-dose radioiodine (1.1 GBq [30 mCi]) is as effective as high-dose radioiodine (3.7 GBq [100 mCi]) for treating patients with differentiated thyroid cancer or whether the effects of radioiodine (especially at a low dose) are influenced by using either recombinant human thyrotropin (thyrotropin alfa) or thyroid hormone withdrawal. METHODS At 29 centers in the United Kingdom, we conducted a randomized noninferiority trial comparing low-dose and high-dose radioiodine, each in combination with either thyrotropin alfa or thyroid hormone withdrawal before ablation. Patients (age range, 16 to 80 years) had tumor stage T1 to T3, with possible spread to nearby lymph nodes but without metastasis. End points were the rate of success of ablation at 6 to 9 months, adverse events, quality of life, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS A total of 438 patients underwent randomization; data could be analyzed for 421. Ablation success rates were 85.0% in the group receiving low-dose radioiodine versus 88.9% in the group receiving the high dose and 87.1% in the thyrotropin alfa group versus 86.7% in the group undergoing thyroid hormone withdrawal. All 95% confidence intervals for the differences were within ±10 percentage points, indicating noninferiority. Similar results were found for low-dose radioiodine plus thyrotropin alfa (84.3%) versus high-dose radioiodine plus thyroid hormone withdrawal (87.6%) or high-dose radioiodine plus thyrotropin alfa (90.2%). More patients in the high-dose group than in the low-dose group were hospitalized for at least 3 days (36.3% vs. 13.0%, P<0.001). The proportions of patients with adverse events were 21% in the low-dose group versus 33% in the high-dose group (P=0.007) and 23% in the thyrotropin alfa group versus 30% in the group undergoing thyroid hormone withdrawal (P=0.11). CONCLUSIONS Low-dose radioiodine plus thyrotropin alfa was as effective as high-dose radioiodine, with a lower rate of adverse events. (Funded by Cancer Research UK; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00415233.).

A Phase I Study of OncoVEXGM-CSF, a Second-Generation Oncolytic Herpes Simplex Virus Expressing Granulocyte Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor

Purpose: To conduct a phase I clinical trial with a second-generation oncolytic herpes simplex virus (HSV) expressing granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (Onco VEXGM-CSF) to determine the safety profile of the virus, look for evidence of biological activity, and identify a dosing schedule for later studies. Experimental Design: The virus was administered by intratumoral injection in patients with cutaneous or s.c. deposits of breast, head and neck and gastrointestinal cancers, and malignant melanoma who had failed prior therapy. Thirteen patients were in a single-dose group, where doses of 106, 107, and 108 plaque-forming units (pfu)/mL were tested, and 17 patients were in a multidose group testing a number of dose regimens. Results: The virus was generally well tolerated with local inflammation, erythema, and febrile responses being the main side effects. The local reaction to injection was dose limiting in HSV-seronegative patients at 107 pfu/mL. The multidosing phase thus tested seroconverting HSV-seronegative patients with 106 pfu/mL followed by multiple higher doses (up to 108 pfu/mL), which was well tolerated by all patients. Biological activity (virus replication, local reactions, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor expression, and HSV antigen-associated tumor necrosis), was observed. The duration of local reactions and virus replication suggested that dosing every 2 to 3 weeks was appropriate. Nineteen of 26 patient posttreatment biopsies contained residual tumor of which 14 showed tumor necrosis, which in some cases was extensive, or apoptosis. In all cases, areas of necrosis also strongly stained for HSV. The overall responses to treatment were that three patients had stable disease, six patients had tumors flattened (injected and/or uninjected lesions), and four patients showed inflammation of uninjected as well as the injected tumor, which, in nearly all cases, became inflamed. Conclusions: Onco VEXGM-CSF is well tolerated and can be safely administered using the multidosing protocol described. Evidence of an antitumor effect was seen.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for oligometastases

The management of metastatic solid tumours has historically focused on systemic treatment given with palliative intent. However, radical surgical treatment of oligometastases is now common practice in some settings. The development of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), building on improvements in delivery achieved by intensity-modulated and image-guided radiotherapy, now allows delivery of ablative doses of radiation to extracranial sites. Many non-randomised studies have shown that SBRT for oligometastases is safe and effective, with local control rates of about 80%. Importantly, these studies also suggest that the natural history of the disease is changing, with 2-5 year progression-free survival of about 20%. Although complete cure might be possible in a few patients with oligometastases, the aim of SBRT in this setting is to achieve local control and delay progression, and thereby also postpone the need for further treatment. We review published work showing that SBRT offers durable local control and the potential for progression-free survival in non-liver, non-lung oligometastatic disease at a range of sites. However, to test whether SBRT really does improve progression-free survival, randomised trials will be essential.

Reduction of small and large bowel irradiation using an optimized intensity-modulated pelvic radiotherapy technique in patients with prostate cancer.

PURPOSE To investigate the role of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to irradiate the prostate gland and pelvic lymph nodes while sparing critical pelvic organs, and to optimize the number of beams required. METHODS AND MATERIALS Target, small bowel, colon, rectum, and bladder were outlined on CT planning scans of 10 men with prostate cancer. Optimized conventional (RT) and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) plans were created and compared to inverse-planned IMRT dose distributions using dose-volume histograms. Optimization of beam number was undertaken for the IMRT plans. RESULTS With RT the mean percentage volume of small bowel and colon receiving >45 Gy was 21.4 +/- 5.4%. For 3D-CRT it was 18.3 +/- 7.7% (p = 0.0043) and for 9-field IMRT it was 5.3 +/- 1.8% (p < 0.001 compared to 3D-CRT). For 7, 5, and 3 IMRT fields, it was 6.4 +/- 2.9%, 7.2 +/- 2.8%, and 8.4 +/- 3.8% (all p < 0.001 compared to 3D-CRT). The rectal volume irradiated >45 Gy was reduced from 50.5 +/- 16.3% (3D-CRT) to 5.8 +/- 2.1% by 9-field IMRT (p < 0. 001) and bladder from 52.2 +/- 12.8% to 7 +/- 2.8% (p < 0.001). Similar benefits were maintained for 7, 5, and 3 IMRT fields. CONCLUSIONS The reduction in critical pelvic organ irradiation seen with IMRT may reduce side effects in patients, and allow modest dose escalation within acceptable complication rates. These reductions were maintained with 3-5 IMRT field plans which potentially allow less complex delivery techniques and shorter delivery times.

PHASE III PILOT STUDY OF DOSE ESCALATION USING CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY IN PROSTATE CANCER: PSA CONTROL AND SIDE EFFECTS

Radical radiotherapy is a standard form of management of localised prostate cancer. Conformal treatment planning spares adjacent normal tissues reducing treatment-related side effects and may permit safe dose escalation. We have tested the effects on tumour control and side effects of escalating radiotherapy dose and investigated the appropriate target volume margin. After an initial 3–6 month period of androgen suppression, 126 men were randomised and treated with radiotherapy using a 2 by 2 factorial trial design. The initial radiotherapy tumour target volume included the prostate and base of seminal vesicles (SV) or complete SV depending on SV involvement risk. Treatments were randomised to deliver a dose of 64 Gy with either a 1.0 or 1.5 cm margin around the tumour volume (1.0 and 1.5 cm margin groups) and also to treat either with or without a 10 Gy boost to the prostate alone with no additional margin (64 and 74 Gy groups). Tumour control was monitored by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and clinical examination with additional tests as appropriate. Acute and late side effects of treatment were measured using the Radiation Treatment and Oncology Groups (RTOG) and LENT SOM systems. The results showed that freedom from PSA failure was higher in the 74 Gy group compared to the 64 Gy group, but this did not reach conventional levels of statistical significance with 5-year actuarial control rates of 71% (95% CI 58–81%) in the 74 Gy group vs 59% (95% CI 45–70%) in the 64 Gy group. There were 23 failures in the 74Gy group and 33 in the 64 Gy group (Hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.38–1.10, P=0.10). No difference in disease control was seen between the 1.0 and 1.5 cm margin groups (5-year actuarial control rates 67%, 95% CI 53–77% vs 63%, 95% CI 50–74%) with 28 events in each group (Hazard ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.50–1.86, P=0.94). Acute side effects were generally mild and 18 weeks after treatment, only four and five of the 126 men had persistent ⩾Grade 1 bowel or bladder side effects, respectively. Statistically significant increases in acute bladder side effects were seen after treatment in the men receiving 74 Gy (P=0.006), and increases in both acute bowel side effects during treatment (P=0.05) and acute bladder sequelae (P=0.002) were recorded for men in the 1.5 cm margin group. While statistically significant, these differences were of short duration and of doubtful clinical importance. Late bowel side effects (RTOG⩾2) were seen more commonly in the 74 Gy and 1.5 cm margin groups (P=0.02 and P=0.05, respectively) in the first 2 years after randomisation. Similar results were found using the LENT SOM assessments. No significant differences in late bladder side effects were seen between the randomised groups using the RTOG scoring system. Using the LENT SOM instrument, a higher proportion of men treated in the 74 Gy group had Grade ⩾3 urinary frequency at 6 and 12 months. Compared to baseline scores, bladder symptoms improved after 6 months or more follow-up in all groups. Sexual function deteriorated after treatment with the number of men reporting some sexual dysfunction (Grade⩾1) increasing from 38% at baseline to 66% at 6 months and 1 year and 81% by year 5. However, no consistent differences were seen between the randomised groups. In conclusion, dose escalation from 64 to 74 Gy using conformal radiotherapy may improve long-term PSA control, but a treatment margin of 1.5 cm is unnecessary and is associated with increased acute bowel and bladder reactions and more late rectal side effects. Data from this randomised pilot study informed the Data Monitoring Committee of the Medical Research Council RT 01 Trial and the two studies will be combined in subsequent meta-analysis.

Delineation of the neck node levels for head and neck tumors: a 2013 update. DAHANCA, EORTC, HKNPCSG, NCIC CTG, NCRI, RTOG, TROG consensus guidelines

In 2003, a panel of experts published a set of consensus guidelines for the delineation of the neck node levels in node negative patients (Radiother Oncol, 69: 227-36, 2003). In 2006, these guidelines were extended to include the characteristics of the node positive and the post-operative neck (Radiother Oncol, 79: 15-20, 2006). These guidelines did not fully address all nodal regions and some of the anatomic descriptions were ambiguous, thereby limiting consistent use of the recommendations. In this framework, a task force comprising opinion leaders in the field of head and neck radiation oncology from European, Asian, Australia/New Zealand and North American clinical research organizations was formed to review and update the previously published guidelines on nodal level delineation. Based on the nomenclature proposed by the American Head and Neck Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, and in alignment with the TNM atlas for lymph nodes in the neck, 10 node groups (some being divided into several levels) were defined with a concise description of their main anatomic boundaries, the normal structures juxtaposed to these nodes, and the main tumor sites at risk for harboring metastases in those levels. Emphasis was placed on those levels not adequately considered previously (or not addressed at all); these included the lower neck (e.g. supraclavicular nodes), the scalp (e.g. retroauricular and occipital nodes), and the face (e.g. buccal and parotid nodes). Lastly, peculiarities pertaining to the node-positive and the post-operative clinical scenarios were also discussed. In conclusion, implementation of these guidelines in the daily practice of radiation oncology should contribute to the reduction of treatment variations from clinician to clinician and facilitate the conduct of multi-institutional clinical trials.

Analysis of the efficacy and toxicity of sorafenib in thyroid cancer: a phase II study in a UK based population.

AIM To evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of sorafenib in patients with thyroid carcinoma. METHODS Patients with progressive locally advanced/metastatic medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC), or differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) with non-radioiodine-avid disease, were treated with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily until disease progression. The primary endpoint was the radiological response rate (RR) at 6 months. Secondary endpoints were RR at 3, 9 and 12 months, biochemical responses, toxicity, biomarker analyses and progression free and overall survival (OS). RESULTS A total of 34 patients were recruited to the study (15 medullary and 19 differentiated). After 6 months, the RR rate was 15% and a further 74% of patients achieved stable disease in the first 6 months. After 12 months of treatment, the RR was 21%. In the MTC patients, the RR at 12 months was 25% and OS was 100%. In DTC patients corresponding rates were 18 and 79% respectively. Median overall and progression-free survival points were not reached at 19 months. Commonest adverse events included hand-foot syndrome, other skin toxicities, diarrhoea and alopecia. Dose reduction was required in 79% patients. Median time on treatment was 16.5 months. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that sorafenib is tolerable at reduced doses over prolonged periods of time in patients with thyroid cancer. Sorafenib leads to radiological and biochemical stabilisation of disease in the majority of these patients despite dose reductions.

Head and neck cancer—Part 1: Epidemiology, presentation, and prevention

#### Summary points Head and neck cancers include cancers of the upper aerodigestive tract (including the oral cavity, nasopharynx, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx), the paranasal sinuses, and the salivary glands. Cancers at different sites have different courses and variable histopathological types, although squamous cell carcinoma is by far the most common. The anatomical sites affected are important for functions such as speech, swallowing, taste, and smell, so the cancers and their treatments may have considerable functional sequelae with subsequent impairment of quality of life. Decisions about treatment are usually complex, and they must balance efficacy of treatment and likelihood of survival, with potential functional and quality of life outcomes. Patients and their carers need considerable support during and after treatment. #### Sources and selection criteria We used the terms “head and neck”, “larynx”, “oral”, and “oropharynx”—with each limited by “cancer”, “diagnosis”, and “treatment” separately—to search the Medline, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, and AMED databases. We also used them to cross check national guidelines, reference lists, textbooks, and personal reference lists. We assessed over 1000 identified abstracts for relevance. In this first part of a two article series, we review the common presentations of head and neck cancer. We also discuss common investigations and new …