Targeting Angiogenesis in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Opportunities in the Immunotherapy Era.

Despite the lack of approved anti-angiogenic therapies in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN), preclinical and more recent clinical evidence support the role of targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in this disease. Targeting VEGF has gained even greater interest following the recent evidence supporting the role of immunotherapy in the management of advanced SCCHN. Preclinical evidence strongly suggests that VEGF plays a role in promoting the growth and progression of SCCHN, and clinical evidence exists as to the value of combining this strategy with immunotherapeutic agents. Close to 90% of SCCHNs express VEGF, which has been correlated with a worse clinical prognosis and an increased resistance to chemotherapeutic agents. As immunotherapy is currently at the forefront of the management of advanced SCCHN, revisiting the rationale for targeting angiogenesis in this disease has become an even more attractive proposition.

Comparison of the Seventh and Eighth Edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging for Selected and Nonselected Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinomas.

OBJECTIVES: The eighth edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging incorporates significant changes to the seventh edition in the staging of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC). An important change was the inclusion of OPSCC associated with the human papilloma virus (HPV). Our goal is to compare the performance of both staging systems for patients with HPV-selected and unselected clinical characteristics for OPSCC. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, 2004-2016, we identified patients with likely HPV-associated OPSCC based on surrogate markers (white males aged <65 years old with squamous cell carcinomas of the tonsil and base of tongue), excluding those who underwent surgery. We re-classified these patients using seventh and eighth edition staging for HPV-selected OPSCC and compared the prediction performance of both staging editions for overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). We performed the same analysis for clinically unselected patients with OPSCC. RESULTS: Our analysis included 9554 patients with a median follow-up of 67 months. Comparing the eighth versus seventh edition for our HPV-selected cohort, clinical staging changed for 92.3% of patients and 10-year OS was 62.2%, 61.2%, 35.3%, and 15.5% for Stage I, II, III, and IV, versus 52.9%, 59.2%, 61.6%, 55.1%, 38.3%, and 15.5% for stage I, II, III, IVA, IVB, and IVC, respectively. A similar pattern was observed for 10-year DSS. The concordance statistics for our HPV-selected cohort were improved for both AJCC 7 (0.6260) and AJCC 8 (0.6846) compared with the unselected cohort, 0.5860 and 0.6457 for AJCC 7 and 8, respectively. CONCLUSION: The overall performance of discrimination improved from AJCC 7 to AJCC 8 for both clinically selected and unselected patients, but more notably for our HPV-selected cohort. Despite the lack of statistically significant differentiation between Stages I and II in AJCC 8 in either groups, markedly improved discrimination was observed between Stages I/II, III, and IV in the HPV-selected cohort.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: efficacy and safety of treatments for opioid-induced constipation.

BACKGROUND: When opioid-induced constipation is treated with centrally acting opioid antagonists, there may be opioid withdrawal or aggravation of pain due to inhibition of µ-opioid analgesia. This led to the development of peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs). AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of available PAMORAs and other approved or experimental treatments for relieving constipation in patients with opioid-induced constipation, based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and EBM Reviews Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was completed in July 2019 for randomised trials compared to placebo. FDA approved doses or highest studied dose was evaluated. Efficacy was based on diverse endpoints, including continuous variables (the bowel function index, number of spontaneous bowel movements and stool consistency based on Bristol Stool Form Scale), or responder analysis (combination of >3 spontaneous bowel movements or complete spontaneous bowel movements plus 1 spontaneous bowel movement or complete spontaneous bowel movements, respectively, over baseline [so-called FDA endpoints]). Adverse effects evaluated included central opioid withdrawal, serious adverse events, abdominal pain and diarrhoea. RESULTS: We included 35 trials at low risk of bias enrolling 13 566 patients. All PAMORAs demonstrated efficacy on diverse patient response endpoints. There was greater efficacy with approved doses of the PAMORAs (methylnaltrexone, naloxegol and naldemidine), with lower efficacy or lower efficacy and greater adverse effects with combination oxycodone with naloxone, lubiprostone and linaclotide. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic response in opioid-induced constipation is best achieved with the PAMORAs, methylnaltrexone, naloxegol and naldemidine, which are associated with low risk of serious adverse events.