CSO (Canadian Society of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery) position paper on rhinologic and skull base surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Healthcare services in many countries have been partially or completely disrupted by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic since its onset in the end of 2019. Amongst the most impacted are the elective medical and surgical services in order to conserve resources to care for COVID-19 patients. As the number of infected patients decrease across Canada, elective surgeries are being restarted in a staged manner. Since Otolaryngologists - Head & Neck Surgeons manage surgical diseases of the upper aerodigestive tract where the highest viral load reside, it is imperative that these surgeries resume in a safe manner. The aim of this document is to compile the current best evidence available and provide expert consensus on the safe restart of rhinologic and skull base surgeries while discussing the pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative care and tips. Risk assessment, patient selection, case triage, and pre-operative COVID-19 testing will be analyzed and discussed. These guidelines will also consider the optimal use of personal protective equipment for specific cases, general and specific operative room precautions, and practical tips of intra-operative maneuvers to optimize patient and provider safety. Given that the literature surrounding COVID-19 is rapidly evolving, these recommendations will serve to start our specialty back into elective rhinologic surgeries over the next months and they may change as we learn more about this disease.

Non-operative management for oral cavity carcinoma: Definitive radiation therapy as a potential alternative treatment approach.

PURPOSE: To determine the outcomes of oral cavity squamous cell cancer (OSCC) patients treated with non-surgical approach i.e. definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). METHODS: All OSCC patients treated radically with IMRT (without primary surgery) between 2005-2014 were reviewed in a prospectively collected database. OSCC patients treated with definitive RT received concurrent chemotherapy except for early stage patients or those who declined or were unfit for chemotherapy. The 5-year local, and regional, distant control rates, disease-free, overall, and cancer-specific survival, and late toxicity were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 1316 OSCC patients treated with curative-intent; 108 patients (8%) received non-operative management due to: medical inoperability (n = 14, 13%), surgical unresectability (n = 8, 7%), patient declined surgery (n = 15, 14%), attempted preservation of oral structure/function in view of required extensive surgery (n = 53, 49%) or extensive oropharyngeal involvement (n = 18, 17%). Sixty-eight (63%) were cT3-4, 38 (35%) were cN2-3, and 38 (35%) received concurrent chemotherapy. With a median follow-up of 52 months, the 5-year local, regional, distant control rate, disease-free, overall, and cancer-specific survival were 78%, 92%, 90%, 42%, 50%, and 76% respectively. Patients with cN2-3 had higher rate of 5-year distant metastasis (24% vs 3%, p = 0.001), with detrimental impact on DFS (p = 0.03) and OS (p < 0.02) on multivariable analysis. Grade ≥ 3 late toxicity was reported in 9% of patients (most common: grade 3 osteoradionecrosis in 6%). CONCLUSIONS: Non-operative management of OSCC resulted in a meaningful rate of locoregional control, and could be an alternative curative approach when primary surgery would be declined, unsuitable or unacceptably delayed.

Tracheoesophageal voice prosthesis management in laryngectomy patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

With the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been significant changes and challenges in the management of oncology patients. One of the major strategies to reduce transmission of the virus between patients and healthcare workers is deferral of follow-up visits. However, deferral may not be possible in total laryngectomy patients. Urgent procedures may be necessary to prevent complications related to ill-fitting tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) voice prostheses, such as aspiration or loss of voicing. In this paper, we describe the Princess Margaret Cancer Center's approach to managing this unique patient population.

Development and validation of a Surgical Prioritization and Ranking Tool and Navigation Aid for Head and Neck Cancer (SPARTAN-HN) in a scarce resource setting: Response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, access to surgical care for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) is limited and unpredictable. Determining which patients should be prioritized is inherently subjective and difficult to assess. The authors have proposed an algorithm to fairly and consistently triage patients and mitigate the risk of adverse outcomes. METHODS: Two separate expert panels, a consensus panel (11 participants) and a validation panel (15 participants), were constructed among international HNC surgeons. Using a modified Delphi process and RAND Corporation/University of California at Los Angeles methodology with 4 consensus rounds and 2 meetings, groupings of high-priority, intermediate-priority, and low-priority indications for surgery were established and subdivided. A point-based scoring algorithm was developed, the Surgical Prioritization and Ranking Tool and Navigation Aid for Head and Neck Cancer (SPARTAN-HN). Agreement was measured during consensus and for algorithm scoring using the Krippendorff alpha. Rankings from the algorithm were compared with expert rankings of 12 case vignettes using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient. RESULTS: A total of 62 indications for surgical priority were rated. Weights for each indication ranged from -4 to +4 (scale range; -17 to 20). The response rate for the validation exercise was 100%. The SPARTAN-HN demonstrated excellent agreement and correlation with expert rankings (Krippendorff alpha, .91 [95% CI, 0.88-0.93]; and rho, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.45-0.95]). CONCLUSIONS: The SPARTAN-HN surgical prioritization algorithm consistently stratifies patients requiring HNC surgical care in the COVID-19 era. Formal evaluation and implementation are required. LAY SUMMARY: Many countries have enacted strict rules regarding the use of hospital resources during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Facing delays in surgery, patients may experience worse functional outcomes, stage migration, and eventual inoperability. Treatment prioritization tools have shown benefit in helping to triage patients equitably with minimal provider cognitive burden. The current study sought to develop what to the authors' knowledge is the first cancer-specific surgical prioritization tool for use in the COVID-19 era, the Surgical Prioritization and Ranking Tool and Navigation Aid for Head and Neck Cancer (SPARTAN-HN). This algorithm consistently stratifies patients requiring head and neck cancer surgery in the COVID-19 era and provides evidence for the initial uptake of the SPARTAN-HN.

COVID-19 pandemic and health care disparities in head and neck cancer: Scanning the horizon.

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly disrupted head and neck cancer (HNC) care delivery in ways that will likely persist long term. As we scan the horizon, this crisis has the potential to amplify preexisting racial/ethnic disparities for patients with HNC. Potential drivers of disparate HNC survival resulting from the pandemic include (a) differential access to telemedicine, timely diagnosis, and treatment; (b) implicit bias in initiatives to triage, prioritize, and schedule HNC-directed therapy; and (c) the marked changes in employment, health insurance, and dependent care. We present four strategies to mitigate these disparities: (a) collect detailed data on access to care by race/ethnicity, income, education, and community; (b) raise awareness of HNC disparities; (c) engage stakeholders in developing culturally appropriate solutions; and (d) ensure that surgical prioritization protocols minimize risk of racial/ethnic bias. Collectively, these measures address social determinants of health and the moral imperative to provide equitable, high-quality HNC care.

Recommendations for head and neck surgical oncology practice in a setting of acute severe resource constraint during the COVID-19 pandemic: an international consensus.

The speed and scale of the global COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented pressures on health services worldwide, requiring new methods of service delivery during the health crisis. In the setting of severe resource constraint and high risk of infection to patients and clinicians, there is an urgent need to identify consensus statements on head and neck surgical oncology practice. We completed a modified Delphi consensus process of three rounds with 40 international experts in head and neck cancer surgical, radiation, and medical oncology, representing 35 international professional societies and national clinical trial groups. Endorsed by 39 societies and professional bodies, these consensus practice recommendations aim to decrease inconsistency of practice, reduce uncertainty in care, and provide reassurance for clinicians worldwide for head and neck surgical oncology in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the setting of acute severe resource constraint and high risk of infection to patients and staff.

Nonsurgical management of resectable oral cavity cancer in the wake of COVID-19: A rapid review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Surgery is the preferred treatment modality for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). However, due to limited resources, re-assessment of treatment paradigms in the wake of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is urgently required. In this rapid review, we described contemporary oncological outcomes for OSCC using non-surgical modalities. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted for articles published between January 1, 2010 and April 1, 2020 on MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL. Studies were included if they contained patients with OSCC treated with either neoadjuvant, induction, or definitive radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or combination thereof, and an outcome of overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 36 articles were included. Definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy were the focus of 18 articles and neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy were the focus of the other 18 articles. In early stage OSCC, definitive radiotherapy, with or without concurrent chemotherapy, was associated with a significantly increased hazard of death compared to definitive surgery (HR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.56-3.67, I2: 63%). The hazard of death was non-significantly increased with definitive chemoradiotherapy in studies excluding early disease (HR: 1.98, 95% CI: 0.85-4.64, I2: 84%). Two recent randomized control trials have been conducted, demonstrating no survival advantage to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: This review suggests that primary radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy are inferior to surgical management for OSCC. Strategies for surgical delay warranting consideration are sparse, but may include several neoadjuvant regimens, recognizing these regimens may not offer a survival benefit over definitive surgery alone.