BACKGROUND:High CD103+ intratumoral immune cell (ITIC) abundance is associated with better prognosis in unselected patients with human papilloma virus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-associated OPSCC) treated with cisplatin and radiotherapy (CIS/RT). Substituting cetuximab (CETUX) for CIS with RT in HPV-associated OPSCC resulted in inferior efficacy. Our aim was to determine whether quantification of CD103 ITIC could be used to identify a population of HPV-associated OPSCC with superior prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS:We pooled data from the TROG 12.01 and De-ESCALaTE randomized trials that compared CETUX/70GyRT with CIS/70GyRT in low-risk HPV-associated OPSCC: American Joint Committee on Cancer 7 stage III (excluding T1-2N1) or stage IV (excluding N2b-c if smoking history >10 pack-years and/or distant metastases), including all patients with available tumor samples. The primary endpoint was failure-free survival (FFS) in patients receiving CETUX/RT comparing CD103+ ITIC high (≥30%) versus low (<30%). High and low CD103 were compared using Cox regression adjusting for age, stage and trial. RESULTS:Tumor samples were available in 159/182 patients on TROG 12.01 and 145/334 on De-ESCALaTE. CD103+ ITIC abundance was high in 27% of patients. The median follow-up was 3.2 years. The 3-year FFS in patients treated with CETUX/RT was 93% [95% confidence interval (CI) 79% to 98%] in high CD103 and 74% (95% CI 63% to 81%) in low CD103 [adjusted hazard ratio = 0.22 (95% CI 0.12-0.41), P < 0.001]. The 3-year overall survival in patients treated with CETUX/RT was 100% in high CD103 and 86% (95% CI 76% to 92%) in low CD103, P < 0.001. In patients treated with CIS/RT, there was no significant difference in FFS. CONCLUSIONS:CD103+ ITIC expression separates CETUX/RT-treated low-risk HPV-associated OPSCC into excellent and poor prognosis subgroups. The high CD103 population is a rational target for de-intensification trials.

Purpose/Objective(s) This secondary analysis aimed to identify HNSS and HRQL trajectories during and following CRT for HPVOPC. Materials/Methods All 182 evaluable TROG 12.01 patients were included. HNSS was assessed with the MDASI-HN (range 0-10) at baseline (BL), weekly during CRT (weeks (w) 1-7) and then 1, 3, 5, 9 and 13w and 6, 12 and 24 months (m) post CRT. HRQL was assessed using the FACT-G (range 0-108) at BL, and 7w, 6m, 12m and 24m post CRT. Latent class growth mixture modelling (LCMM) was performed to identify trajectories. Mean estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated at each time point. Results The HNSS model identified 4 trajectory classes (HNSS1-4) distinguished by differences in HNSS at BL, during the peak of treatment symptoms (w7 CRT/1w post CRT) and during early (1w to 9w post CRT) and intermediate recovery (9w to 12m post CRT). The trajectories of all 4 classes were stable beyond 12m. The reference trajectory (HNSS4, n=74) score was 0.1 (CI 0.1-0.2) at BL, peaking at 4.6 (CI 4.2-5.0), with rapid early recovery (1.1, CI 0.8-2.2) and gradual improvement to 12m (0.6, CI 0.5-0.8). HNSS2 ("high BL", n=30) reported higher BL scores (1.4, CI 0.8-2.0) but was otherwise similar, HNSS3 ("low acute", n=53) reported reduced acute symptoms (2.5, CI 2.2-2.9) with stable scores beyond 9w post CRT (1.1, CI 0.9-1.4). HNSS1 ("slow recovery", n=25) had slower recovery from an acute peak of 4.9 (CI 4.3-5.6) to 0.9 (CI 0.6-1.3) at 12m. Compared to HNSS4, the high BL group were younger (mean 53.6 vs 57.4), with fewer ECOG0 (87 vs 99%) or with higher degree (38 vs 69%), and higher baseline anxiety (HADS, mean 6.8 vs 4.4). The low acute group were older (mean 60.1), had fewer ECOG0 patients (87%) and were more likely to have received cetuximab (68% vs 43%). The slow recovery group had fewer with a higher degree (52%). The HRQL model included 2 trajectory classes. The reference trajectory (HRQL2, n=156) scores were 90 (CI 88-92) at BL, similar 7w post CRT (88, CI 85-90) with slow but clinically meaningful improvement to 12m (98, CI 96-100). HRQL1 (n=26) had lower BL mean scores (80, CI 74-86), with a significant decline at 7w post CRT (57, CI 50-63) and a slower recovery to BL scores over 12m (83, CI 72-94). Both trajectories were flat beyond 12m. The slow recovery group were older (mean 61.1 vs 56.8), with worse BL anxiety (mean 6.5 vs 4.4) and depression (mean 4.5 vs 2.1). In addition, LCMM identified 4 trajectories for head and neck symptom interference, 3 for anxiety and 4 for depression, which will be presented. Conclusion LCMM identified distinct trajectories of HNSS and HRQL during and after CRT. These and their associations with variations in HPVOPC patients' characteristics and treatment factors provide clinically relevant insights into identifying patients who may require increased support during and after CRT.

Contemporary cancer care is multidisciplinary and should provide evidence based and protocol driven advice to patients, aiming for cure or relief of symptoms at as little personal cost to patients as possible, while minimising the financial burden to the system. The achievement of locoregional cure may involve combinations of systemic therapy, surgery and radiotherapy, aiming for maximal organ preservation and function. 1 Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG)Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100 000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet. 2012; 379: 432-444 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1457) Google Scholar , 2 Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005; 366: 2087-2106 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (4018) Google Scholar

Summary One of the first steps towards the development of a comprehensive quality program for radiation oncology in Australia has been a survey of practice. This paper reports on the results of the survey that should inform the development of standards for radiation oncology in Australia. A questionnaire of 108 questions spanning aspects of treatment services, equipment, staff, infrastructure and available quality systems was mailed to all facilities providing radiation treatment services in Australia ( n = 45). Information of 42 sites was received by June 2006 providing data on 113 operational linear accelerators of which approximately 2/3 are equipped with multi‐leaf collimators. More than 75% of facilities were participating in a formal quality assurance (QA) system, with 63% following a nationally or internationally recognised system. However, there was considerable variation in the availability of policies and procedures specific to quality aspects, and the review of these. Policies for monitoring patient waiting times for treatment were documented at just 71% of all facilities. Although 85% of all centres do, in fact, monitor machine throughput, the number and types of efficiency measures varied markedly, thereby limiting the comparative use of these results. Centres identified workload as the single most common factor responsible for limiting staff involvement in both QA processes and clinical trial participation. The data collected in this ‘snapshot’ survey provide a unique and comprehensive baseline for future comparisons and evaluation of changes.

Summary The aim of this study was to determine the regional control rate with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) based on pretreatment nodal size in mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in patients who achieved a complete response (CR) at the primary site by 12 weeks post‐treatment. Between December 1997 and November 2003, 117 patients with node‐positive HNSCC were treated with concurrent CRT, with 108 (92%) achieving a CR at the primary site by 12 weeks. There were 93 males (86%), median age 55 (37–79) years and the most common primary site was the oropharynx (65%). Patients were divided into three subgroups: ≤3.0 cm 70 (65%), 3.1–6.0 cm 30 (28%) and ≥6.1 cm 8 (7%). All patients received concurrent platinum‐based chemotherapy and the median radiation dose was 70 Gy (60–72 Gy). The 3‐year regional control rate based on pretreatment nodal size was ≤3.0 cm 88% (95% confidence interval (CI) 78–94%), 3.1–6.0 cm 72% (95%CI 49–86%) and ≥6.1 cm 50% (95%CI 15–77%) ( P = 0.001). The 3‐year regional control rate based on pre‐treatment nodal size was ≤3.0cm 88% (95%CI 78–94%), 3.1–6.0 cm 72% (95%CI 49–86%) and ≥6.1 cm 50% (95%CI 15–77%) ( P = 0.001). These results provide a quantitative guide for the clinician as to the likelihood of regional control based on pretreatment nodal size following CRT in patients who achieve a CR at the primary site by 12 weeks post‐treatment.

BACKGROUND:Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the head and neck is a common cancer that has the potential to metastasize to lymph nodes in the parotid gland and neck. Previous studies have highlighted limitations with the current TNM staging system for metastatic skin carcinoma. The aim of this study was to test a new staging system that may provide better discrimination between patient groups. METHODS:A retrospective multicenter study was conducted on 322 patients from three Australian and three North American institutions. All had metastatic cutaneous SCC involving the parotid gland and/or neck and all were treated for cure with a minimum followup time of 2 years. These patients were restaged using a newly proposed system that separated parotid disease (P stage) from neck disease (N stage) and included subgroups of P and N stage. Metastases involved the parotid in 260 patients (149 P1; 78 P2; 33 P3) and 43 of these had clinical neck disease also (22 N1; 21 N2). Neck metastases alone occurred in 62 patients (26 N1; 36 N2). Ninety percent of patients were treated surgically and 267 of 322 received radiotherapy. RESULTS:Neck nodes were pathologically involved in 32% of patients with parotid metastases. Disease recurred in 105 (33%) of the 322 patients, involving the parotid in 42, neck in 33, and distant sites in 30. Parotid recurrence did not vary significantly with P stage. Disease-specific survival was 74% at 5 years. Survival was significantly worse for patients with advanced P stage: 69% survival at 5 years compared with 82% for those with early P stage (P = 0.02) and for those with both parotid and neck node involvement pathologically: 61% survival compared with 79% for those with parotid disease alone (P = 0.027). Both univariate and multivariate analysis confirmed these findings. Clinical neck involvement among patients with parotid metastases did not significantly worsen survival (P = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS:This study, which included a mixed cohort of patients from six different institutions, provides further information about the clinical behavior of metastatic cutaneous SCC of the head and neck. The hypothesis that separation of parotid and neck disease in a new staging system is supported by the results. The benefit of having subgroups of P and N stage is uncertain, but it is likely to identify patients with unfavorable characteristics that may benefit from further research.

The purpose of this study was to document how radiation oncology departments in Australia and New Zealand manage extended waiting lists by prioritizing patients for radiotherapy and how these centres define the ‘waiting time’. A literature search on strategies for management of waiting lists in radiotherapy, both locally and internationally, was performed. A collaborative survey of all the radiotherapy departments in Australia and New Zealand was then undertaken. Of the 32 centres surveyed around Australia and New Zealand, 25 (77%) responded. There was considerable variation in the definitions used for ‘waiting times’. Eleven of the 25 centres had formally documented protocols. New Zealand has a national policy for prioritization of patients for radiotherapy. Six centres had verbal protocols. Four centres had no significant waiting times and did not require a protocol for prioritization. One centre prioritized according to clinician discretion, two centres used a first-come, first-served basis. One centre replied but their protocol was missing. The variation in the definition of waiting time reduces its usefulness as an indirect measure of resources and as a method of comparing centres. There is also wide variation in the management of waiting lists, particularly in the prioritization schedules used by different centres. The major factor contributing to waiting lists at present is a shortage of radiation oncology staff, particularly radiation therapists. The implementation of standardized protocols for prioritizing patients may be useful in helping to manage scarce resources not withstanding the need to increase the resource base. However, the existence of such protocols should not give legitimacy to undue delays in commencing radiation treatment.

PURPOSETo select one of two chemoradiotherapy regimens for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the head and neck as the experimental arm for the next Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group phase III trial.PATIENTS AND METHODSOne hundred twenty-two previously untreated patients with stage III/IV SCC of the head and neck were randomized to receive definitive radiotherapy (70 Gy in 7 weeks) concurrently with either cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) plus tirapazamine (290 mg/m(2)/d) on day 2 of weeks 1, 4, and 7, and tirapazamine alone (160 mg/m(2)/d) on days 1, 3, and 5 of weeks 2 and 3 (TPZ/CIS), or cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)) on day 1 and infusional fluorouracil (360 mg/m(2)/d) on days 1 through 5 of weeks 6 and 7 (chemoboost).RESULTSThree-year failure-free survival rates were 55% with TPZ/CIS (95% CI, 39% to 70%) and 44% with chemoboost (95% CI, 30% to 60%; log-rank P = .16). Three-year locoregional failure-free rates were 84% in the TPZ/CIS arm (95% CI, 71% to 92%) and 66% in the chemoboost arm (95% CI, 51% to 79%; P = .069). More febrile neutropenia and grade 3 or 4 late mucous membrane toxicity were observed with TPZ/CIS, while acute skin radiation reaction was more severe and prolonged with chemoboost. Compliance with protocol treatment was satisfactory on both arms.CONCLUSIONBoth regimens are feasible and are associated with significant but acceptable toxicity profiles in the cooperative group setting. Based on the promising efficacy seen in this trial, TPZ/CIS is being evaluated in a large phase III trial.

The aim of this study was to investigate the beliefs that patients with advanced cancer held about the curability of their cancer, their use of alternatives to conventional medical treatment, and their need to have control over decisions about treatment. Of 149 patients who fulfilled the criteria for participation and completed a self-administered questionnaire, 45 patients (31%) believed their cancer was incurable, 61 (42%) were uncertain and 39 (27%) believed their cancer was curable. The index of need for control over treatment decisions was low in 53 patients (35.6%) and high in only 17 patients (11.4%). Committed users of alternatives to conventional medical treatments were more likely to believe that their cancer was curable ( P <0.001) and to have a higher need for control over decisions about treatment ( P <0.004). The mean need for control scores were highest in patients who believed that their cancer was curable, or who were uncertain about the curability of their cancer, but who acknowledged that their oncologist had reported that the cancer was incurable. The diverse beliefs, attitudes and actions of these patients were consistent with a range of psychological adaptions to a life-threatening illness, some realistic and others illusory. Illusory responses influence what communication can achieve in daily oncology practice.

Patients with advanced cancer frequently express positive attitudes and can be unduly optimistic about the potential benefits of treatment. In order to evaluate an illusory domain in the context of advanced cancer, we developed a scale of will to live and characterized the beliefs that patients held about the curability of their cancer, and how committed they were to using alternative treatments. A measure of quality of life was used as the dependent variable in order to assess the association between these attributes. After a preliminary exploration confirmed the presence of an illusory domain, these concepts were prospectively tested in 149 ambulant patients with advanced cancer who attended for palliative systemic treatment, radiation treatment or supportive care. The scale of global quality of life was reliable (Cronbach's alpha coefficient 0.72). The distribution of the scores of will to live was skewed, with no respondent scoring poorly, and the scale was reliable (Cronbach's alpha coefficient 0.82). The scale of belief in curability showed diverse beliefs. In some cases, there was a discrepancy between respondents' beliefs in curability and what they believed to be the report by their doctors. There was also an association between a committed use of alternative treatments and a belief in the curability of the cancer (p<0.001). In a multiple regression analysis, both will to live and performance status remained associated with better quality of life scores after adjustment for other relevant variables (p<0.05 and <0.001, respectively). These results suggest that positive illusory beliefs can be measured and are an important component of adaption for some patients with advanced cancer. Furthermore, this illusory domain may influence the perception and measurement of quality of life.

Prior to the dissemination of evidence-based quality assurance guidelines, the Australian National Breast Cancer Centre Radiation Oncology Group conducted a process survey of breast radiotherapy treatment delivery throughout Australia. A process survey was conducted in August/September 1998. This survey comprised questions enquiring about treatment positioning, immobilization devices used, planning strategies, simulation and dose computation methods, treatment prescribing and quality assurance. The survey was sent to 123 Australian fellows of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) and to the six directors of New Zealand radiation oncology departments. Fifty-eight questionnaires were returned of which 38 were received from individuals and 20 represented a reply from a department with a routine breast radiotherapy protocol (representing an average of 4.5 radiation oncologists per reply). The study identified great consistency between departments with respect to dose and fractionation for breast tangents. The study also identified some areas of treatment planning and delivery that varied between individuals or departments. These mainly reflected a lack of evidence in some areas of radiotherapy treatment delivery. The circulation of quality assurance guidelines will perhaps improve consistency of radiotherapy techniques in which studies have identified that technique changes improve outcome. This study identified that these areas include the taking of simulation and port films and the use of off-axis dosimetry. Further studies are required for areas of radiotherapy treatment delivery that have little evidence for or against their implementation.

Australasian RadiologyVolume 44, Issue 1 p. 3-4 Workforce requirements in radiation oncology: A complex issue Liz Kenny, Liz Kenny Division of Oncology, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Herston, Queensland, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author Liz Kenny, Liz Kenny Division of Oncology, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Herston, Queensland, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 24 December 2001 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1673.2000.00778.xCitations: 4 Correspondence: Dr L Kenny 362 Gold Creek Road, Brookfield, Qld 4069, Australia L Kenny FRANZCR. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article.Citing Literature Volume44, Issue1February 2000Pages 3-4 RelatedInformation

This paper examines the extent to which patients who have been diagnosed as having terminal cancer choose to use non-medical therapies. In particular it is concerned with the illness behaviour of patients who are receiving conventional cytotoxic drug and radiation treatments, who also decide to use a wide range of 'alternative' medications and therapies. The paper discusses the findings of a study of 152 patients with metastatic cancer that examined the extent to which they used alternative cancer therapies, as well as the beliefs and attitudes they have about their cancer, its treatment, and the practitioners providing that treatment. Four groups of users of alternative therapies, who differ according to their commitment to and the type of therapies they use, were identified. Results of logistic regression analyses indicate that those using alternative therapies were different in range of social attitudes. These differences were primarily their greater reported 'will to live' and desire for control over treatment decisions, and the differing beliefs they hold about their disease.