Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Discussion session - Head and neck cancers

1490 - Predictor of Effectiveness of Treatment Intensification on Overall Survival in Head and Neck Cancer (HNC)

Date

20 Oct 2018

Session

Poster Discussion session - Head and neck cancers

Topics

Targeted Therapy

Tumour Site

Head and Neck Cancers

Presenters

Kaveh Zakeri

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2018) 29 (suppl_8): viii372-viii399. 10.1093/annonc/mdy287

Authors

K. Zakeri1, F. Rotolo2, B. Lacas2, L.K. Vitzthum1, Q.X. Le3, V. Gregoire4, J. Overgaard5, J. Tobias6, B. Zackrisson7, M.K. Parmar8, B.A. Burtness9, M.G. Ghi10, G. Sanguineti11, B. O'Sullivan12, C. Fortpied13, J. Bourhis14, H. Shen1, J. Harris15, J. Pignon2, L.K. Mell1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Radiation Medicine And Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, 92093 - La Jolla/US
  • 2 Plateforme Ligue Contre Le Cancer, Service De Biostatistique Et D’epidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, 94800 - Villejuif/FR
  • 3 Department Of Radiation oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 94305 - Stanford/US
  • 4 Radiation oncology Department, Leon Berard Cancer Center, 69373 - Lyon/FR
  • 5 Department Of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, 8000 - Aarhus/DK
  • 6 Department Of Radiotherapy, University College Hospital, London/GB
  • 7 Department Of Radiation Sciences - Oncology, Umeå University, Umeå/SE
  • 8 Mrc Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, WC2B 6NH - London/GB
  • 9 Department Of Medical Oncology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven/US
  • 10 Oncology Unit 2, Istituto Oncologico Veneto-IRCCS, Padua/IT
  • 11 Department Of Radiation oncology, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome/IT
  • 12 Department Of Radiation oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto/CA
  • 13 EORTC - European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, 1200 - Brussels/BE
  • 14 Department Of Radiotherapy, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, 1011 - Lausanne/CH
  • 15 Statistics And Data Management Center, NRG Oncology, Philadelphia/US
More

Resources

Abstract 1490

Background

Predictors of the effectiveness of intensive treatment for locoregionally advanced HNC are lacking. We developed and validated a predictive model to identify patients most likely to benefit from treatment intensification (altered fractionation (AFX) or chemotherapy (CT)) based on the relative hazard for cancer recurrence vs. competing mortality, with patients at higher risk for recurrence relative to non-cancer mortality classified as “high risk.”

Methods

We analyzed 22,398 HNC patients treated on randomized trials testing CT and AFX. For predictive model training, we applied a risk score based on generalized competing event (GCE) regression to the MARCH dataset (11,174 patients, 30 trials) and compared this to a risk score based on a Cox model for progression-free survival (PFS). We externally tested both models on the MACH-NC dataset (11,355 patients, 54 trials). Normalized model inputs included age, performance status (PS), sex, site, T and N category, P16 status, and smoking history. P16 and smoking were available for 18% and 49% of patients in MARCH, respectively, but not in MACH-NC. Risk strata were defined as low, medium, and high based on PFS or GCE score tertiles. We assessed for interactions between risk strata and AFX or CT on overall survival (OS).

Results

Factors associated significantly with GCE risk score were age, PS, tumor site, T and N category, and P16 status. The effect of AFX in MARCH was greater in the medium and high (HR [95% CI]=0.91 [0.84-0.98]; 0.92 [0.85-0.99]) vs. low risk group (HR = 0.97 [0.90-1.05]; p = 0.15 for interaction; p = 0.03 for risk score>85th percentile) defined by GCE model. When applied to MACH-NC, the effect of CT on OS was significantly greater in the medium and high (HR = 0.86 [0.78-0.88]; 0.81 [0.75-0.88]) vs. the low risk group (HR = 0.96 [0.86-1.08]; p = 0.014 for interaction). In contrast, the effects of AFX and CT were similar across PFS model strata, indicating its lack of predictive ability (p > 0.05 for all interactions). 30% of patients older than 70 belonged to a GCE risk group benefitting from CT.

Conclusions

GCE risk score is better than PFS risk score for predicting the benefit of intensive treatment on OS in HNC. This work is on behalf of MARCH/MACH-NC Collaborative Group and of the HNCIG.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Loren Mell. MD.

Funding

UCSD Head and Neck Cancer Center of Excellence.

Editorial Acknowledgement

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.