Treatment modalities to manage hepatocellular carcinoma patients with portal vein thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A number of therapeutic treatment strategies exist for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT). The aim of this review is to provide a current understanding of treatment options and determine the relative effectiveness of treatment options in preventing mortality over 24 months. METHODS: A search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL from 2007 to 2022. Articles were screened to identify those that reported on all-cause mortality among treated, non-palliative patients with HCC and PVT. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool (ROBINS-1). Mortality rates at prespecified timepoints between 6 and 24 months were extracted and summarized using a random-effects DerSimonian-Laird model. This review was registered a priori on PROSPERO (CRD42022290708). RESULTS: When comparing radiotherapy (RT) to sorafenib and combined transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), there was a trend that RT yields better survival at 6 months [odds ratio (OR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-1.76]. When comparing sorafenib to Y90 and RT, sorafenib was associated with higher odds for mortality at 6 months (OR 2.20, 95% CI: 1.11-4.39). No significant differences were noticed from 12 to 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Future strategies for HCC with PVT should look at the combination of radiation and systemic treatments either concurrently or sequentially.

The evolution of immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Since approval of sorafenib in 2008, systemic therapy has been established as the main treatment option for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recently, immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) have been extensively tested in this setting. Multiple ICI combination regimens have recently received regulatory approval and new data continues to emerge. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive summary of the most up-to-date evidence on ICI combinations in advanced HCC. METHODS: A search of published and presented literature was conducted to identify phase III trials of ICI combinations in advanced HCC patients. Supplemental bibliographic search of review articles and meta-analyses was also conducted. Efficacy and safety data was summarized in text, tables, and plots. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION: The literature search identified a total of six phase III trials assessing ICI combinations in advanced HCC. Two trials compared ICI plus anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody combinations to sorafenib, three trials compared ICI plus tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) combinations to TKIs alone, and one trial compared a dual ICI regimen to sorafenib. Statistically significant survival benefits were seen with atezolizumab-bevacizumab and sintilimab-bevacizumab biosimilar as well as durvalumab-tremelimumab and camrelizumab-rivoceranib combinations. ICI combination regimens have also shown improvements in response rates and progression-free survival relative to the previous standard of care, sorafenib, and generally presented predictable and manageable safety profiles. CONCLUSION: ICI combinations represent the new standard of care for advanced HCC. Ongoing randomized trials and real-world evidence will further clarify the role of these combinations in this rapidly evolving field.

Clinical consensus statement: Establishing the roles of locoregional and systemic therapies for the treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) a leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide and approximately one-third of patients present with intermediate-stage disease. The treatment landscape of intermediate-stage HCC is rapidly evolving due to developments in local, locoregional and systemic therapies. Treatment recommendations focused on this heterogenous disease stage and that take into account the Canadian reality are lacking. To address this gap, a pan-Canadian group of experts in hepatology, transplant, surgery, radiation therapy, nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, and medical oncology came together to develop consensus recommendations on management of intermediate-stage HCC relevant to the Canadian context. METHODS: A modified Delphi framework was used to develop consensus statements with strengths of recommendation and supporting levels of evidence graded using the AHA/ACC classification system. Tentative consensus statements were drafted based on a systematic search and expert input in a series of iterative feedback cycles and were then circulated via online survey to assess the level of agreement. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: The pre-defined ratification threshold of 80 % agreement was reached for all statements in the areas of multidisciplinary treatment (n = 4), intra-arterial therapy (n = 14), biologics (n = 5), radiation therapy (n = 3), surgical resection and transplantation (n = 7), and percutaneous ablative therapy (n = 4). These generally reflected an expansion in treatment options due to developments in previously established or emergent techniques, introduction of new and more active therapies and increased therapeutic flexibility. These developments have allowed for greater treatment tailoring and personalization as well as a paradigm shift toward strategies with curative intent in a wider range of disease settings.

The CCTG PA.7 phase II trial of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with or without durvalumab and tremelimumab as initial therapy in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Immunotherapy-based monotherapy treatment in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) has shown limited benefit outside of the mismatch repair deficiency setting, while safety and efficacy of combining dual-checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy with chemotherapy remains uncertain. Here, we present results from the CCTG PA.7 study (NCT02879318), a randomized phase II trial comparing gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with and without immune checkpoint inhibitors durvalumab and tremelimumab in 180 patients with mPDAC. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and objective response rate. Results of the trial were negative as combination immunotherapy did not improve survival among the unselected patient population (p = 0.72) and toxicity was limited to elevation of lymphocytes in the combination immunotherapy group (p = 0.02). Exploratory baseline circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing revealed increased survival for patients with KRAS wildtype tumors in both the combination immunotherapy (p = 0.001) and chemotherapy (p = 0.004) groups. These data support the utility of ctDNA analysis in PDAC and the prognostic value of ctDNA-based KRAS mutation status.

Toxicity Profiles of Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The recent development of targeted therapy and immunotherapy has made neoadjuvant therapy an attractive option for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, surgeons are concerned that adverse effects of neoadjuvant therapy with these agents could lead to delayed or even cancelled surgeries. Objective: To summarize the current evidence regarding toxicity profiles for tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) among patients with HCC. Data Sources: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from January 1990 and December 2021. Study Selection: Single-group, placebo-controlled, and dual-agent clinical trials comparing TKIs and ICIs in patients with HCC were eligible for inclusion. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following the Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guideline, 2 reviewers independently extracted data. A random-effects model was used. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with clinically significant liver-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients who experienced clinically relevant (grade 3 or higher) adverse events and significant adverse events (ie, those that were life threatening, required hospitalization, or prolonged disability) as well as the risk ratio (RR) of these complications. Results: Overall, 30 studies with 12 921 patients were included. Patients had a mean (range) age of 62 (18-89) years; a mean (SD) 84% (3) were male; a mean (SD) 82% (16) had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C HCC; and a mean (SD) 97% (6) had Childs A cirrhosis. Overall, 21% (95% CI, 16%-26%) of patients receiving TKIs had liver toxic effects compared with 28% (95% CI, 21%-35%) of patients receiving ICIs. Severe adverse events occurred in 46% (95% CI, 40%-51%) of patients receiving TKIs compared with 24% (95% CI, 13%-35%) of patients receiving ICIs. Compared with patients receiving sorafenib, other TKIs were associated with similar rates of liver toxic effects (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.92-1.24) but higher rates of severe adverse events (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.44). Comparing ICIs with sorafenib, there were similar rates of liver toxic effects (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.86-1.40) and severe adverse events (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.95-1.50). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, serious adverse events were lower with ICIs than with TKIs, while liver toxic effects were similar. Combination therapy with novel ICIs is an appealing option in trials of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with HCC, requiring evaluation in preoperative trials.

Impact of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in oligoprogressive metastatic disease.

PURPOSE: There is increasing interest in using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in areas of oligoprogressive metastatic disease (OPD). Our main objective was to investigate the impact of SBRT on overall survival (OS) and the incidence of systemic therapy treatment switches in this population. METHODS: A retrospective institutional review of patients treated with SBRT for OPD was performed. Patients were included if they received SBRT for 1-3 discrete progressing metastases, using a dose of at least 5 Gy per fraction. The study aimed to calculate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), local control (LC), and incidence of treatment switch (TS). PFS and OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier methodology, while LC and TS were determined using cumulative incidence. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients with a total of 118 lesions were treated with SBRT from July 2014 to November 2020. The Median SBRT dose was 40 (18-60) Gy in 5 (2-8) fractions. Patients had primarily kidney, lung, or breast cancer. Most patients were treated with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) (30.9%) or chemotherapy (29.6%) before OPD. The median follow-up post-SBRT was 14 months. Median OS and PFS were 25.1 (95% CI 11.2-39.1) months and 7.8 (95% CI 4.6-10.9) months, respectively. The cumulative incidence of local progression of treated lesions was 5% at 1 year and 7.3% at 2 years. Sixty patients progressed after SBRT and 17 underwent additional SBRT. Thirty-eight patients (47%) changed systemic therapy following SBRT; the cumulative incidence of TS was 28.5% at 6 months, 37.4% at 1 year, and 43.9% at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT effectively controls locally progressing lesions but distant progression still occurs frequently. A sizeable number of patients can be salvaged by further SBRT or have minimally progressing diseases that may not warrant an immediate initiation/switch in systemic therapy. Further prospective studies are needed to validate this benefit.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Lenvatinib in the Treatment of Advanced or Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma from a Canadian Perspective.

Lenvatinib is an oral multikinase inhibitor indicated for the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). In the Phase III REFLECT trial, lenvatinib was noninferior in the primary endpoint of overall survival versus sorafenib, the only systemic therapy funded in Canada prior to the introduction of lenvatinib. Lenvatinib also demonstrated statistically significant improvement compared to sorafenib in secondary endpoint progression-free survival, time to progression, and objective response rate. The aim of this analysis was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib versus sorafenib for the first-line treatment of patients with uHCC from a Canadian perspective. A cost-utility analysis was conducted using partitioned survival modelling, with health states representing progression-free disease, progressed disease, and death. Health effects were measured using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were represented in Canadian dollars. Clinical inputs were derived from the REFLECT trial, with outcomes extrapolated using parametric survival models. EQ-5D data collected in REFLECT were used to determine health state utility values, and estimates of resource use came from a survey of clinicians. The model predicted incremental costs of-$5,021 and incremental QALYs of 0.17, making lenvatinib dominant over sorafenib. The model demonstrates lenvatinib to be a cost-effective use of resources versus sorafenib in Canada for the treatment of uHCC. Overall costs are lower compared with sorafenib, while health benefits are greater, with modelled progression-free and overall survival extended by 4.1 and 2.6 months in the lenvatinib arm, respectively.

Non-surgical management of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review by Cancer Care Ontario.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a global health problem, accounting for 4.7% of all new cancer cases and 8.2% of all cancer deaths worldwide in 2018. Resection and transplantation are the only modalities that offer a cure for HCC; however, most patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, precluding these curative treatments. A number of local (ie, ablative therapies) and/or local-regional therapies (ie, chemo-embolization) are used and followed by systemic therapy for advanced or progressive disease. Other treatments are available, but their efficacy compared with these standards is not well known. Methods: Literature searches (1/2000 to 1/2020 or 1/2005 to 1/2020, depending on the specific systematic review question) were conducted, including MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Results: Over 30,000 articles were identified. In total, 49 studies were included in the systematic review. Conclusions: There is no evidence to support the addition of sorafenib to any local or regional therapy. First-line systemic therapy options for unresectable or metastatic HCC include sorafenib, lenvatinib, and atezolizumab + bevacizumab. Regorafenib or cabozantinib provide survival benefits when given as second-line treatment.

MRI vs. CT for the Detection of Liver Metastases in Patients With Pancreatic Carcinoma: A Comparative Diagnostic Test Accuracy Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The detection of liver metastases is important for pancreatic cancer curative treatment eligibility. The data suggest that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is more sensitive than computed tomography (CT) for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer liver metastases. However, MRI is not currently recommended in multiple published guidelines. PURPOSE: To perform a comparative diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis comparing CT and MRI for pancreatic cancer liver metastases detection. STUDY TYPE: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and multiple radiology society meeting archives were searched until November 2018. Comparative design studies reporting on liver CT and MRI accuracy for detection of pancreatic cancer liver metastases in the same cohort were included. FIELD STRENGTH: 1.5T or 3.0T. ASSESSMENT: Demographic, methodologic, and diagnostic test accuracy data were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. STATISTICAL TESTS: Accuracy metrics were obtained using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. The impact of different covariates on accuracy estimates was assessed using a meta-regression model. Covariates included modality, study design, tumor characteristics, risk of bias, and imaging protocols. RESULTS: Fourteen studies including 987 patients with pancreatic cancer (205 with liver metastases) were included. Sensitivity for CT and MRI was 45% (confidence intervals [95% CI] 21-71%) and 83% (95% CI 74-88%), respectively. Specificity for CT and MRI was 94% (95% CI 84-98%) and 96% (95% CI 93-97%), respectively. The greater observed sensitivity of MRI was preserved in the meta-regression model (P = 0.01), while no difference in specificity was detected (P = 0.16). CT sensitivity was highest for triphasic and quadriphasic examinations compared to single phase or biphasic protocols (P = 0.03). Most studies were at high risk of bias. DATA CONCLUSION: MRI is more sensitive than CT for pancreatic cancer liver metastases detection, accounting for confounding variables. Consideration of this finding in clinical practice guidelines is recommended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 3.

Optimizing Survival and the Changing Landscape of Targeted Therapy for Intermediate and Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) consisting of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib has remained unchanged for over a decade, although results from phase III targeted therapy trials have recently emerged. This review considers available phase III evidence on the use and sequencing of targeted therapy for intermediate and advanced non-locoregional therapy (LRT) eligible HCC and discusses implications for clinical practice. METHODS: Published and presented literature on phase III data reporting on targeted therapy for advanced HCC that was not eligible for loco-regional therapies was identified using the key search terms "hepatocellular cancer" AND "advanced" AND "targeted therapy" AND "phase III" OR respective aliases (PRISMA). RESULTS: Ten phase III trials assessed targeted therapy first-line and eight following sorafenib. In the first-line, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab statistically significantly improved overall survival (OS) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) compared with sorafenib, while lenvatinib demonstrated non-inferior OS. Following progression on sorafenib, statistically significant OS improvements over placebo were seen for cabozantinib and regorafenib in unselected patients and for ramucirumab in those with baseline α-fetoprotein≥400 ng/mL. Based on improved OS and PROs, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab appears to be a preferred first-line treatment option for intermediate or advanced non-LRT eligible HCC. Phase III data informing sequencing of later lines of treatment is lacking. Therefore, sequencing principles are proposed that can be used to guide treatment selection. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing trials will continue to inform optimal therapy. Multiple targeted therapies have improved OS in intermediate or advanced non-LRT eligible HCC, although optimal sequencing is an area of ongoing investigation.

A Practical Approach to the Management of Cancer Patients During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An International Collaborative Group.

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread globally since being identified as a public health emergency of major international concern and has now been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). In December 2019, an outbreak of atypical pneumonia, known as COVID-19, was identified in Wuhan, China. The newly identified zoonotic coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by rapid human-to-human transmission. Many cancer patients frequently visit the hospital for treatment and disease surveillance. They may be immunocompromised due to the underlying malignancy or anticancer therapy and are at higher risk of developing infections. Several factors increase the risk of infection, and cancer patients commonly have multiple risk factors. Cancer patients appear to have an estimated twofold increased risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. With the WHO declaring the novel coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, there is an urgent need to address the impact of such a pandemic on cancer patients. This include changes to resource allocation, clinical care, and the consent process during a pandemic. Currently and due to limited data, there are no international guidelines to address the management of cancer patients in any infectious pandemic. In this review, the potential challenges associated with managing cancer patients during the COVID-19 infection pandemic will be addressed, with suggestions of some practical approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The main management strategies for treating cancer patients during the COVID-19 epidemic include clear communication and education about hand hygiene, infection control measures, high-risk exposure, and the signs and symptoms of COVID-19. Consideration of risk and benefit for active intervention in the cancer population must be individualized. Postponing elective surgery or adjuvant chemotherapy for cancer patients with low risk of progression should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Minimizing outpatient visits can help to mitigate exposure and possible further transmission. Telemedicine may be used to support patients to minimize number of visits and risk of exposure. More research is needed to better understand SARS-CoV-2 virology and epidemiology.

Hypovascular pancreas head adenocarcinoma: CT texture analysis for assessment of resection margin status and high-risk features.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if CT texture analysis features are associated with hypovascular pancreas head adenocarcinoma (PHA) postoperative margin status, nodal status, grade, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and perineural invasion (PNI). METHODS: This Research Ethics Board-approved retrospective cohort study included 131 consecutive patients with resected PHA. Tumors were segmented on preoperative contrast-enhanced CT. Tumor diameter and texture analysis features including mean, minimum and maximum Hounsfield units, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis, and entropy and gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) features correlation and dissimilarity were extracted. Two-sample t test and logistic regression were used to compare parameters for prediction of margin status, nodal status, grade, LVI, and PNI. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and Youden method was used to establish cutpoints. RESULTS: Margin status was associated with GLCM correlation (p = 0.012) and dissimilarity (p = 0.003); nodal status was associated with standard deviation (p = 0.026) and entropy (p = 0.031); grade was associated with kurtosis (p = 0.031); LVI was associated with standard deviation (p = 0.047), entropy (p = 0.026), and GLCM correlation (p = 0.033) and dissimilarity (p = 0.011). No associations were found for PNI (p > 0.05). Logistic regression yielded an area under the curve of 0.70 for nodal disease, 0.70 for LVI, 0.68 for grade, and 0.65 for margin status. Optimal sensitivity/specificity was as follows: nodal disease 73%/72%, LVI 72%/65%, grade 55%/83%, and margin status 63%/66%. CONCLUSIONS: CT texture analysis features demonstrate fair diagnostic accuracy for assessment of hypovascular PHA nodal disease, LVI, grade, and postoperative margin status. Additional research is rapidly needed to identify these high-risk features with better accuracy. KEY POINTS: • CT texture analysis features are associated with pancreas head adenocarcinoma postoperative margin status which may help inform treatment decisions as a negative resection margin is required for cure. • CT texture analysis features are associated with pancreas head adenocarcinoma nodal disease, a poor prognostic feature. • Indicators of more aggressive pancreas head adenocarcinoma biology including tumor grade and LVI can be diagnosed using CT texture analysis with fair accuracy.

Real-world outcomes of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic cancer: A population-based propensity score-weighted analysis.

BACKGROUND: In Ontario, FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been publicly funded for first-line unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (uLAPC) or metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) since April 2015. We examined the real-world effectiveness and safety of FFX vs GnP for advanced pancreatic cancer, and in uLAPC and mPC. METHODS: Patients receiving first-line FFX or GnP from April 2015 to March 2017 were identified in the New Drug Funding Program database. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were obtained through the Ontario Cancer Registry and other population-based databases. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and weighted Cox proportional hazard models, weighted by the inverse propensity score adjusting for baseline characteristics. Weighted odds ratio (OR) for hospitalization and emergency department visits (EDV) were estimated from weighted logistic regression models. RESULTS: For 1130 patients (632 FFX, 498 GnP), crude median OS was 9.6 and 6.1 months for FFX and GnP, respectively. Weighted OS was improved for FFX vs GnP (HR = 0.77, 0.70-0.85). Less frequent EDV and hospitalization were observed in FFX (EDV: 67.8%; Hospitalization: 49.2%) than GnP (EDV: 77.7%; Hospitalization: 59.3%). More frequent febrile neutropenia-related hospitalization was observed in FFX (5.8%) than GnP (3.3%). Risk of EDV and hospitalization were significantly lower for FFX vs GnP (EDV: OR = 0.68, P = .0001; Hospitalization: OR = 0.76, P = .002), whereas the risk of febrile neutropenia-related hospitalization was significantly higher (OR = 2.12, P = .001). Outcomes for uLAPC and mPC were similar. CONCLUSION: In the real world, FFX had longer OS, less frequent all-cause EDV and all-cause hospitalization, but more febrile neutropenia-related hospitalization compared to GnP.

Simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases (RESECT), a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: The "traditional approach" to resect synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastases (CRLM) is to perform staged resections. Many institutions perform simultaneous resection. Disadvantages to the simultaneous approach include longer operating room times, which may increase major postoperative complication rates. Data supporting simultaneous resection are limited to retrospective studies that are subject to selection bias. Therefore, we have proposed a single-arm prospective cohort pilot study to evaluate the postoperative complications following simultaneous resection of synchronous CRLM. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-arm study will be performed in five high-volume hepatobiliary centres to prospectively evaluate the following objectives: (1) To determine the 90-day postoperative complication rate of patients diagnosed with synchronous CRLM undergoing a simultaneous colorectal and liver resection, including major liver resections; (2) To determine the postoperative mortality rate at 90 days following index surgery; (3) To determine change in global health-related Quality of Life (QoL) following simultaneous resection at three months compared to baseline; and (4) To build a costing model for simultaneous resection, We will also evaluate the feasibility of performing combined resection in these patients by evaluating the number of eligible patients enrolled in the study and determining the reasons eligible patients were not enrolled. This protocol has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02954913). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been provincially approved by the central research ethics board. Study results will inform the design a randomized controlled trial by providing information about the comprehensive complication index in this patient population used to calculate the sample size for the trial.

Systemic therapy in the curative treatment of head and neck squamous cell cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the available evidence and make recommendations regarding use of systemically administered drugs in combination or in sequence with radiation (RT) and/or surgery for cure and/or organ preservation in patients with locally advanced nonmetastatic (Stage III to IVB) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN). METHOD: Recognizing the Meta-analysis of Chemotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer (MACH-NC) group reports have de facto guided practice since 2000, we searched for systematic reviews in the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published from January 2000 to February 2015 in reference to 4 research questions. A search was also conducted for randomized trials (RCTs) up to February 2015 not included in the meta-analyses. RESULT: The MACH-NC reports, 5 additional meta-analyses, and 30 RCTs not included by MACH-NC were identified. For chemotherapy, MACH-NC findings showing improved overall survival with concomitant chemoRT did not require modification. High-dose cisplatin was most commonly studied. We confirmed this benefit with cisplatin monotherapy in patients treated with with postoperative concurrent chemoRT. Other than cetuximab, no targeted agents and radiosensitizers studied in RCTs were shown effective. TPF induction chemotherapy was superior to PF for tumor response and larynx preservation but not survival. Larynx preservation was reported with both CRT and induction chemotherapy approaches. CONCLUSION: ChemoRT with cisplatin at least 40 mg/m2 per week given as radical or postoperative adjuvant remains a standard treatment approach for LASCCHN that improves overall survival but increases toxicity. 5-FU plus platinum is supported by less data but may be a reasonable alternative for patients unsuitable for cisplatin. Of note, stratification of outcomes by HPV-status was not available but outcomes for oropharynx cancer appeared similar to other subsites in chemoRT RCTs. No RCTs have yet demonstrated superiority or non-inferiority of cetuximab-RT to CRT. In view of this, cetuximab-RT is suggested only for patients not candidates for CRT. Taxane-based triplet induction chemotherapy is superior to doublets for rapid tumour downsizing and for larynx preservation, but does not improve overall survival and should be used with primary G-CSF prophylaxis. Further investigation of induction approaches for larynx preservation may be warranted.