1559 Quality of life (QOL) following radical helical tomotherapy intensity modulated radiotherapy (HTIMRT) in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck cancer (SCCHN)

2015 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. S224
Author(s):  
M.Y. Almaghrabi ◽  
H. Marginean ◽  
S. El-Sayed
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Helical Tomotherapy ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy ◽  
Intensity Modulated

scholarly journals Proton therapy for non-squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: planning comparison and toxicity

2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 612-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiromitsu Iwata ◽  
Toshiyuki Toshito ◽  
Kensuke Hayashi ◽  
Maho Yamada ◽  
Chihiro Omachi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Dose Distributions

Abstract To investigate optimal treatment planning using proton beams for non-squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (NSCHN), the dose distributions of plans involving pencil beam scanning (PBS) with or without a patient-specific aperture system (PSAS), passive-scattering proton therapy (PSPT) and X-ray intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) were compared. As clinical results, toxicities of PBS with PSAS, including changes in quality of life, were reported. Between April 2014 and August 2016, a total of 30 patients were treated using PBS with PSAS. In 20 patients selected at random, the dose distributions of PBS with or without the PSAS, PSPT and IMRT plans were compared. Neutron exposure by proton therapy was calculated using a Monte Carlo simulation. Toxicities were scored according to CTCAE ver. 4.0. Patients completed EORTC quality of life survey forms (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-HN35) before and 0–12 months after proton therapy. The 95% conformity number of PBS with the PSAS plan was the best, and significant differences were detected among the four plans (P < 0.05, Bonferroni tests). Neutron generation by PSAS was ~1.1-fold higher, but was within an acceptable level. No grade 3 or higher acute dermatitis was observed. Pain, appetite loss and increased weight loss were more likely at the end of treatment, but recovered by the 3 month follow-up and returned to the pretreatment level at the 12 month follow-up. PBS with PSAS reduced the penumbra and improved dose conformity in the planning target volume. PBS with PSAS was tolerated well for NSCHN.

scholarly journals Quality of Life With Pembrolizumab for Recurrent and/or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: KEYNOTE-040

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin J Harrington ◽  
Denis Soulières ◽  
Christophe Le Tourneau ◽  
Jose Dinis ◽  
Lisa F Licitra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

Abstract Background Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL); few treatments have demonstrated clinically meaningful HRQoL benefit. KEYNOTE-040 evaluated pembrolizumab vs standard of care (SOC) in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC whose disease recurred or progressed after platinum-containing regimen. Methods Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg or SOC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab). Exploratory HRQoL analyses used European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 30 quality-of-life, EORTC 35-question quality-of-life head and neck cancer-specific module, and EuroQoL 5-dimensions questionnaires. Results The HRQoL population comprised 469 patients (pembrolizumab = 241, SOC = 228). HRQoL compliance for patients in the study at week 15 was 75.3% (116 of 154) for pembrolizumab and 74.6% (85 of 114) for SOC. The median time to deterioration in global health status (GHS) and QoL scores were 4.8 months with pembrolizumab and 2.8 months with SOC (hazard ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.59 to 1.05). At week 15, GHS / QoL scores were stable for pembrolizumab (least squares mean [LSM] = 0.39, 95% CI = –3.00 to 3.78) but worsened for SOC (LSM = −5.86, 95% CI = −9.68 to −2.04); the LSM between-group difference was 6.25 points (95% CI = 1.32 to 11.18; nominal 2-sided P = .01). A greater difference in the LSM for GHS / QoL score occurred with pembrolizumab vs docetaxel (10.23, 95% CI = 3.15 to 17.30) compared with pembrolizumab vs methotrexate (6.21, 95% CI = −4.57 to 16.99) or pembrolizumab vs cetuximab (−1.44, 95% CI = −11.43 to 8.56). Pembrolizumab-treated patients had stable functioning and symptoms at week 15, with no notable differences from SOC. Conclusions GHS / QoL scores were stable with pembrolizumab but declined with SOC in patients at week 15, supporting the clinically meaningful benefit of pembrolizumab in recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC.

scholarly journals Assessing Preferences in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Phase I and II of Questionnaire Development

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 3577
Author(s):  
Pierluigi Bonomo ◽  
Alice Maruelli ◽  
Calogero Saieva ◽  
Katherine Taylor ◽  
Susanne Singer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Team Approach

Shared-decision making for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is challenged by the difficulty to integrate the patient perception of value within the framework of a multidisciplinary team approach. The aim of this study was to develop a questionnaire to assess the preferences of HNSCC patients with respect to the disease trajectory, expected treatment, and toxicities. In accordance with the standardized EORTC Quality of Life Group’s methodology for the development of quality of life modules, a phase 1–2 study was envisaged. Following a systematic review of the literature, a consolidated list of 28 issues was administered through a semi-structured interview to 111 patients from 7 institutions in 5 countries. Overall, “cure of disease”, “survival”, and “trusting in health care professionals” were the 3 most common priorities, being chosen by 87.3%, 73.6% and 59.1% of patients, respectively. When assessing the correlation with the treatment subgroup, the issue of “being thoroughly and sincerely informed about treatments’ efficacy and survival expectation” was highly prevalent in an independent manner (71.4%, 75% and 90% of patients in the follow-up, palliative and curative subgroups, respectively). Based on prespecified scoring criteria, a 24-item list was generated. Pending clinical applicability, further testing and validation of the questionnaire are warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document