Annals of Surgical Oncology, 10(6):645653

DOI: 10.1245/ASO.2003.06.032

Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: A 5- to 20-Year Experience With Preoperative Chemotherapy, Uncompromised Surgery, and Selective Radiotherapy
John M. Lor, Jr, MD, Sol Kaufman, PhD, Nan Sundquist, RN, and Kandala K. Chary, MD

Background: A 5- to 20-year evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy uncompromised surgery and selective radiotherapy in stage III/IV head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Methods: Eighty-two consecutive patients, single surgeon previously untreated, operable, and resectable for cure. Sites included the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx. Two chemotherapeutic regimens were used: initial regimen (A), cisplatin/bleomycin (n 45 patients); revised regimen (B), cisplatin/5-fluorouracil (n 37 patients). The extent of surgery was carefully documented before chemotherapytattoo when feasible. This forms a strict guide for uncompromised surgery. Selective postoperative radiotherapy was based on specific criteria. Results: Minimum follow-up was 5 years. Absolute survival: total group, 60%; regimen A, 46%; and regimen B, 77% (P .004). Relative survival (correcting for life table mortality): total group, 66%; regimen A, 50%; and regimen B, 83% (P .003). Recurrences: primary site, n 9 (regimen A, n 7 [16%]; regimen B, n 2 [5%]) and neck, n 6 (13%, all in regimen A). Distant metastasis occurred in 12 patients (10 [22%] in regimen A and 2 [5%] in regimen B). Conclusions: This study suggests treatment of advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (resectable for cure) with preoperative chemotherapy (regimen B); resection of original tumor volume, regardless of response to chemotherapy; and selective (rather than routine) postoperative radiotherapy results in improved survival. More controlled studies are recommended. Key Words: Head and neck cancerPreoperative chemotherapySurvival analysisTreatment evaluationPostoperative radiotherapy.

Management of locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN) continues to present a challenge because of relatively poor survival rates and a high incidence of functional impairment among survivors. Since the 1970s, the conventional treatment for resectable tumors has been surgery with postoperative radiotherapy (with 5-year survival rates ranging from 10% to 60%).1 6 In more recent years, significant strides have been made toward improved functional outcome, most notably
Received June 25, 2001; accepted March 10, 2003. From the Head and Neck Center (JML, NS, KKC), Sisters of Charity Hospital, Buffalo, New York; and State University of New York (SK), Buffalo, New York. Address correspondence and reprint requests to: John M. Lor, Jr, MD, Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263; Fax: 716-845-8646.
Published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2003 The Society of Surgical Oncology, Inc.

preservation of speech, through the use of combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy (sequentially or concurrently), with surgery reserved for salvage of treatment failures,711 but the effect of this approach on overall survival rates remains to be fully clarified. A further concern with this approach is the development of significant surgical complications in irradiated tissues when salvage resection is subsequently required (a problem that beset head and neck surgeons in the 1950s and 1960s when preoperative radiotherapy was in vogue). Reported studies on preoperative chemotherapy as an additional adjuvant or substitute for postoperative radiotherapy, although initially promising, have tended to be equivocal.1215 From review of these earlier studies and from personal experience, the principal author of this article (J.M.L.) formulated an approach to preoperative chemotherapy that does not diminish the subsequent ablative resection. This led to a treatment protocol that places the highest priority on improved survival. Quality 645

646

J. M. LOR ET AL. infusion). Most patients received two courses of this combination separated by a 3-week interval. During the last few years of patient entry, the cisplatin dose was increased to 100 mg/m2 and the number of courses was increased to three or more to reflect evolving practice. Most patients receiving regimens A and B were treated without dose modification. When dose reductions were required because of neutropenia or other toxicity, standard criteria were pursued. Of the 82 patients who completed the protocol, 45 were treated according to regimen A and 37 according to regimen B (Table 1). Surgery The resectionsincluding all ablative procedures (no significant portion was conducted by a resident, fellow, or other attending surgeon) and 95% of the reconstructive procedureswere performed by a single surgeon (J.M.L.). Follow-up of all patients was performed primarily by the operating surgeon monthly the first year, every 2 months the second year, every 3 months the third year, every 4 months the fourth year, every 5 months the fifth year, and every 6 months thereafter. Resection was based on meticulous pretreatment evaluation of the primary cancer by the surgeon. The T stage was predicated on ulceration and the extent of the firm, submucosal indurated mass. Computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging scanning were used. Palpation was considered a very important feature of physical examination. Areas of edema and fullness were included in wide resection of the primary tumor but did not alter the T classification. The critical task of documenting the extent of the primary tumor before chemotherapy was conducted by tattoo, photography, or both and was recorded on stamps or printed diagrams. The operation was planned intending no modification or compromise in the extent of resection after induction chemotherapy, although the resection might be extended if indicated in the course of the procedure. Oral cavity primary tumors were resected with margins of 1 to 2 cm. With unilateral palatal tumors, the

of life (particularly speech and deglutition), which remains a concern, is addressed primarily through improved reconstructive procedures and complementary therapies. The essential aspects of this treatment protocol are preoperative chemotherapy, surgery uncompromised by any favorable response to the chemotherapy, and selective postoperative radiotherapy based on specific criteria. The primary tumor sites targeted are the larynx, hypopharynx, oropharynx, and oral cavity. The underlying rationale for this approach derives from the following observations: 1. Chemotherapeutic agents appropriate for LASCCHN can cause appreciable, even dramatic, reduction in gross tumor (and, by implication, in microscopic distant disease). 2. Shrinkage of gross tumor is not necessarily accompanied by corresponding control of all microscopic disease in the region of shrinkage. 3. Postoperative radiotherapy can cause significant sequelae that often impair patient functional status and complicate subsequent salvage resections. The protocol commenced in 1979 and continues to date. Details of the protocol and early results were published in 1995.16 This article is a 5- to 20-year evaluation and follow-up of patients entered between 1979 and 1994. A total of 93 patients were entered during this period. However, five patients refused resection after completion of chemotherapy, and six patients were deemed medically inoperable after chemotherapy (although their tumors remained resectable). Hence, 82 patients completed the protocol and represent the principal subjects of this report. PATIENTS AND METHODS All patients entered onto the study were consecutive and those of a single surgeon and presented with previously untreated stage III or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, or hypopharynx. All were deemed operable and resectable for cure. Chemotherapy Regimen A used a combination of bleomycin and cisplatin (cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously [IV] day 1 considered the appropriate dose at that timeand bleomycin 15 mg/m2/day IV days 1 to 5 by continuous infusion). As evidence regarding the relative efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents in LASCCHN accumulated, regimen B was adopted; it replaced bleomycin with 5-fluorouracil (cisplatin 80 mg/m2 IV day 1 and 5-fluorouracil 1000 mg/m2/day IV days 1 to 5 by continuous
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003

TABLE 1. Distribution by site, stage, and treatment regimen

Stage Site Larynx Hypopharynx Oropharynx Oral cavity Total n 21 10 36 15 82 III 6 2 9 7 24 IV 15 8 27 8 58 A 12 8 20 5 45 Regimen B 9 2 16 10 37

PREOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY EVALUATION uvula and portions of the contralateral palate were removed, along with dissection of the ipsilateral parapharyngeal space, as indicated. In the oropharynx, margins were 1.5 to 2.5 cm and continued into the parapharyngeal space. Often, portions of the palate and juxtaposed tongue were included. Tongue-base tumor margins were generally 1.5 to 2.5 cm because a lack of fascia in tongue muscles allows deep invasion of the muscle. All stage III/IV tumors of the larynx required total laryngectomy and, at times, portions or all of the hypopharynx. Stage III/IV tumors of the hypopharynx usually required total hypopharyngectomy and total laryngectomy. A narrow strip of mucosa was not preserved for the gullet. For patients with clinical cervical nodal metastases, a classical radical neck dissection (RND) was performed. The RND was modified with preservation, repair, or nerve grafting of the spinal accessory nerve when there was no disease at level II and/or V and with preservation of the contralateral internal jugular vein in bilateral neck dissection. RNDs were performed in 77 patients, 3 of whom had concomitant contralateral suprahyoid neck dissections. Two patients had suprahyoid neck dissection alone, and three were treated without neck dissection. No functional or other selective neck dissections were performed. Cervical skin and platysma reconstructive flaps were used only after a concomitant neck dissection. Deltopectoral flaps were used initially for soft tissue defects but were subsequently supplanted by pectoralis major myocutaneous flaps, which were also used for reconstruction of the hypopharynx and proximal cervical esophagus. Posterior tongue flap and dermal graft were also used for the hypopharynx. Levator scapula muscle flaps were sometimes applied to cover carotid vessels, and forehead flaps were used early in the series for cheek and intraoral reconstruction. Segmental resections of the mandible were generally reconstructed with double-bent pins. Reconstruction plates were occasionally used. Only two microvascular free tissue reconstructions were performed. Routine frozen-section analyses of margins of both the operation site and the specimen were performed during the resection and were evaluated by both the surgeon and pathologist. If frozen-section analyses showed tumor involvement, the area was re-resected until it was clear of disease. Five hundred frozen sections were performed on 80 of the 82 patients, with 285 frozen sections at the primary site and 215 of the neck. Radiotherapy Criteria for selective postoperative radiotherapy were adapted, with modifications, from the head and neck

647

cancer management guidelines published in 1979 by the National Institutes of Health,17 as follows: 1. Highest or lowest neck dissection node positive. 2. Margins positive (on permanent section). 3. Extracapsular nodal spread. 4. Extension of disease beyond the fascial planes of the neck. 5. Invasion of deep cervical musculature. 6. Recurrence within 6 weeks. Statistical Analysis Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Standard errors for confidence bounds and t-tests were calculated by using Greenwoods formula. Overall differences between two survival curves were evaluated with the Mantel-Haenszel (log-rank) test.18 Survival time was measured from the start of chemotherapy to patient death (regardless of cause) or was censored as of the patients last follow-up date. This yields an estimated absolute probability of survival from all causes of death. To focus on the effect of disease on survival, the expected mortality of the patients (had they not had the disease) was removed via an adjustment for normal age/ sex mortality based on the National Center for Health Statistics 1997 life table.19 A second set of Kaplan-Meier survival curves was thereby generated and labeled relative survival. These curves may be interpreted as an estimate for the probability of surviving the disease itself (unaffected by competing causes of death). RESULTS Survival The median follow-up of patients alive at last follow-up was 7.6 years (regimen A, 12.9 years; regimen B, 6.3 years). Absolute survival for the entire study group from the start of preoperative chemotherapy is shown in Fig. 1. The results for regimens A and B separately are shown in Fig. 2. Analogous results for estimated relative survival are shown in Figs. 3 and 4. Most cancer-related deaths seem to take place during the first 6 years of follow-up. After 6 years, the mortality seems similar to that from sex-and age-specific mortality for the overall US population. Five- and 10-year survival probabilities are listed in Table 2. Selection of regimen was not predicated on patient or disease characteristics, and other facets of management were similar, so the relative effectiveness of the two regimens may be compared. In comparison of 5-year intervals, regimen B showed superior survival compared with regimen A (P .003 and .004, respectively). However, 10-year
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003

648

J. M. LOR ET AL.

FIG. 1. Estimated absolute survival for the total study group (n 82) with 95% confidence intervals.

FIG. 3. Estimated relative survival for the total study group (n 82) with 95% confidence intervals.

survivals did not differ significantly. Statistical power here is limited by the small number of regimen B patients followed up for 10 years. Survival analysis of the stage III (n 24) and stage IV (n 58) subgroups of the 82 patients revealed no significant difference. Estimated 5-year absolute survivals by major primary tumor site classification were larynx, 72%; hypopharynx, 36%; oropharynx, 52%; and oral cavity, 72%. An alternative subgrouping was analyzed on the basis of the observed chemotherapy response. When patients had clinically positive nodes, a summary chemotherapy response was computed by averaging responses at the primary tumor site and in the neck. The 82 patients were partitioned into 4 groups: 1. Maximal responders (90%; n 18; 8 with regimen A and 10 with regimen B). 2. Partial responders (50%90%; n 44; 22 with regi-

men A and 22 with regimen B). 3. Minimal responders (50%; n 18; 13 with regimen A and 5 with regimen B). 4. Response data missing (n 2). Two patients with tumor progression were included among minimal responders. Five-year absolute survival estimates for the first three groups were 70%, 68%, and 27%, respectively. The difference between partial and minimal responders was statistically significant (P .002). Complications Significant complications due to chemotherapy are listed in Table 3. Three patients experienced 1- to 3-week delays in resection because of hypokalemia, myelosuppression, and pancreatitis. Sixty-six patients received two courses, seven received three or more courses, and

FIG. 2.

Estimated absolute survival in regimens A and B.

FIG. 4.

Estimated relative survival in regimens A and B.

Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003

PREOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY EVALUATION

TABLE 2. Selected survival probabilities
5y Variable n 10 y

649

TABLE 4. Surgical complications (nonlife-threatening; N 82)

Variable n (%) Pharyngoesophageal stricture 6 (7) Dysphagia (functional) 5 (6) Prolonged dysphagia 2 (2) Infection 4 (5) Fistula 3 (4) Tongue (tethered; limited mobility; anterior one-third slough) 3 (4) Dehiscence (flap) 1 (1) Aspiration pleural effusion 1 (1) Poor wound healing 1 (1) Edema (left upper extremity) 1 (1) Intractable pain 1 (1) Narrowed cervical esophagus (beyond area of surgery) 1 (1) Exacerbation of cardiopulmonary problem 1 (1) Total patients 24a (29)
a

Absolute Relative Absolute Relative (%) (%) (%) (%) 60 46 77 .004 66 50 83 .003 45 36 46 .5 58 44 64 .3

Total group 82 Regimen Aa 45 Regimen Bb 37 Comparison of A and B (P value)

a b

Bleomycin 5-Fluorouracil.

nine received only one course. Two patients underwent resection because of progression during the first course. Life-threatening surgical complications included one intraoperative death from myocardial infarction, one respiratory failure, and one perforated gastric ulcer, with recovery. Additional surgical complications are listed in Table 4 and do not differ from those anticipated without preoperative chemotherapy.16,20 Two patients required repeat dilation of stricture. Virtually all patients had tracheotomies and feeding tubes. Four patients had temporary tracheotomies maintained from 20 days to 4 months. Thirty-one patients had permanent stomas associated with total laryngectomy (18 larynx, 9 hypopharynx, and 4 oropharynx). Gastrostomies were required in three patients. Vascular Involvement Two patients had unresectable metastatic disease about the internal and common carotid arteries. No carotid artery resections were required, in contrast to the principal authors (J.M.L.) prior experience.21 Radiotherapy Nineteen patients (23%) received radiotherapy. Eight patients (10%) received it within 6 weeks of resection for
TABLE 3. Chemotherapy toxicities/complications affecting therapy
Regimen A Regimen B (N 45), (N 37), n(%) n(%) 3 (7) 1 (2) 2 (4) 1 (2) 1 (2) 1 (2) 1 (2) 1 (2) 1 (2) 10a (20) 2 (5)

Some patients had multiple complications.

protocol-specified indications, as detailed in Table 5. Twelve patients received radiation at intervals exceeding 6 weeks to treat recurrence. Details are listed in Table 6. Recurrences Nine patients had recurrence at the primary tumor site, as shown in Table 7. There was a significantly higher recurrence rate for oropharyngeal tumors in comparison to all other sites (P .02). All six neck recurrences occurred in regimen A patients (13%). This differed significantly from the zero neck recurrence rate in regimen B (P .03). All six patients died of disease. Distant Metastasis Distant metastases occurred in 12 patients (15%): 10 (22%) of 45 patients treated according to regimen A and 2 (5%) of 37 patients treated according to regimen B (P .03). Patients with carcinoma of the hypopharynx had a 40% incidence of distant metastases; this was significantly greater than that of all other sites (P .015) Patients Excluded From the Study Outcomes for the five patients who refused resection after the completion of chemotherapy are listed in Table 8, and those for the six patients who proved inoperable (on medical grounds) after chemotherapy are listed in Table 9. DISCUSSION

Variable Myelosupression Gastrointestinal (vomiting, nausea, diarrhea) Hypokalemia Nephrotoxicity Hepatotoxicity Ototoxicity Anorexia/weight loss Imbalance/tremor Adult respiratory distress syndrome Total patients
a

1 (3) 3 (8)

Some patients had multiple toxicities.

An objective of this treatment protocol was to ascertain whether preoperative chemotherapy followed by the originally needed resection plus the selective addition of postoperative radiotherapy improved survival compared
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003

650

J. M. LOR ET AL.
TABLE 5. Early selective postoperative radiotherapy N 8
Regimen and primary tumor site A Indication Oropharynx (n 20) LFU at 3 mo DOC at 26 mo DOD at 16 mo DOD at 10 mo DOD at 8 mo DOC at 11 mo DOD at 4 mo Alive at 82 mo Hypopharynx (n 8) Oropharynx (n 16) B Larynx (n 9) Hypopharynx (n 2)

Highest node positive Margins positive (on permanent section) Extracapsular spread Invasion of cervical musculature Early recurrence at primary disease site Highest node and margins positive

DOD, dead of disease; DOC, dead of other causes; LFU, lost to follow-up n total number of patients in each primary site within each regimen.

with surgery followed by routine postoperative radiotherapy (the latter combination was widely recognized as standard treatment for LASCCHN at the time of the initiation of this study). Within the confines of the principal authors (J.M.L.) practice, this was the case. In our first report,16 a more limited assessment was attempted via a comparison of a subset of 37 patients with 37 controls from the Head and Neck Contracts Program14 who were retrospectively matched by site and stage. The resulting 5-year survival of 62% for our patient subset compared with 35% in the Contracts Program controls seemed substantial but proved equivocal (P .07). Objective assessment of the entire series is not possible because the experience does not reflect a randomized, controlled trial (RCT). Additionally, The nature of the RCTs is that they are difficult to use to evaluate surgical techniques.22 However, regimen Bs 5-year absolute survival of 77%, compared with the range of 10% to 60% reported in the literature,1 6 suggests the promise of a treatment paradigm that warrants further investigation. It is not possible to definitively explain the markedly improved survival under regimen B relative to regimen

A. Possible considerations are (1) greater effectiveness of 5-FU over bleomycin for LASCCHN, (2) a shift to a higher cisplatin dose and to three courses of chemotherapy (which took place toward the end of the study period), (3) disparities in the distribution of primary tumor sites, tumor-node-metastasis classifications, and staging between the two regimens, and (4) advances in supportive care. Regimen A had a higher proportion of poorer-prognosis patients with oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal tumors. Regimen B had a higher proportion of stage IV patients (76%) than did regimen A (67%; data not shown). The nearly equivalent survival rates observed in the stage III and IV subgroups could be because more patients with poorer-prognosis stage IV disease were treated through the more effective regimen B. Additional advantages in substituting preoperative chemotherapy for routine postoperative radiotherapy were that (1) radiotherapy was available in the event of nonresectable recurrence and (2) pretreatment tracheostomy was reduced essentially to zero. The emergence of combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy (either sequentially or concurrently) over the

TABLE 6. Late postoperative radiotherapy N 12

Regimen and primary tumor site A Indication Recurrence at primary tumor site Recurrence in neck Second primary tumor Metastasis to contralateral neck Oropharynx (N 20) (n 3) DOD at 6, 15, and 27 mo (n 1) DOD at 35 mo (n 1) DOD at 18 mo (n 1) DOD at 45 mo Larynx (N 12) Hypopharynx (N 8) Oropharynx (N 16) (n 1) DOD at 50 mo (n 1) DOD at 75 mo B Larynx (N 9)

(n 1) DOD at 71 mo

(n 3) DOD at 16, 16 and 100 mo

DOD, died of disease. a This patient also received early postoperative radiotherapy. N total number of patients in each primary site within each regimen.
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003

PREOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY EVALUATION

TABLE 7. Primary tumor site recurrences N 9
Regimen Site Oropharynx (n 36) Larynx (n 21) Hypopharynx (n 10) Oral cavity (n 15) Total
a

651

A (n 45) 6 (15, 20, 27, 35, 50, 93) 1 (alive at 150 mo) 1 (52)a 0 8 (18%)
a

B (n 37) 1 (10) 0 0 0 1 (2%)

a

Total 7 (19%) 1 (5%) 1 (10%) 0 (0%)

Duration of survival in months. n total number of patients in each primary site. n total number of patients in each regimen.

past decade forms an accepted alternative treatment for LASCCHN. The focus of this approach is on organ preservation to enhance quality of life.711 In treatment of head and neck cancer, organ preservation has been most closely identified with preservation of the larynx and normal speech. With respect to the quality of life, inability to swallow probably represents a more serious problem than loss of laryngeal speech. In this respect, combination chemotherapy with radiation may not necessarily provide better swallowing than surgical resection, because patients are placed at increased risk for late sequelae, including radiation-induced fibrosis and neuropathy,23 as well as persistent mucositis. The focus of our protocol is on improved survival while striving by other means to minimize the debilitating effects of treatment. These methods include (1) limiting radiotherapy (which is recognized as a source of long-term complications and as an impediment to subsequent salvage surgery); (2) using reconstructive surgery, implants, and prosthesis; and (3) using supportive services from speech pathologists, prosthodontists, and physiatrists. Hence, this protocol and the chemotherapy/ radiation approaches do not necessarily conflict. They may offer choices to patients with widely different values concerning the importance of survival alone in comTABLE 8. Noncompliersa (n 5)
Primary tumor site Larynx Larynx Oropharynx and hypopharynx Oropharynx Oropharynx Regimen A A B B B Alternative treatments Outcome Time (mo)

parison to preserving nearly normal appearance and function.24 The development of this paradigm in 1979 was based on the premise that surgery is the mainstay of treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, with adjunctive roles for other modalities.25 These tenets are still widely accepted: the most satisfactory treatment is, of course, to completely excise the tumor at the first operation, and perioperative frozen section histological examination is helpful in achieving this end,26 and Aggressive surgical resection is the cornerstone of therapy, with increasing roles for both radiation and chemotherapy, especially for organ preservation.27 Bounding the Disease Documentation of the extent of disease is of great importance if one is to rely on surgery as the backbone of treatment after induction chemotherapy. Tattooing is the preferred method because the time lapse between the original evaluation and resection may exceed 6 weeks. This is too long a time to depend on memory, even when there is a minimal response to the preoperative chemotherapy. Figure 5 demonstrates a lesion with a 90% response to regimen B. The mucosa is intact, but deep to it are viable tumor cells (arrow) that would have been left behind if not for the tattoo, which outlined the pretreatment extent of cancer. Clinical complete response obscuring deep microscopic disease is also observed at other organ sites, e.g., in the rectum: A significant percentage of clinical complete responders have persistent deep tumors or nodal involvement.28 Despite the substantial number of patients with maximal tumor response to chemotherapy, only one surgical specimen was found to be disease free on pathologic examination. Frozen Section The regular use of frozen section is supported in the literature.25,29,30 A total of 500 frozen-sections analyses were performed on all but 2 patients. Fifty-eight of these
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003

RT DOD 5 RT, laryngectomy DOC (NED) 74 RT LFU (WD) 32 Refused RT, CT RT DOD DOD 17 37

RT, radiotherapy; CT, chemotherapy; DOD, died of disease; DOC, died of other causes; LFU, lost to follow-up; WD, with disease; NED, no evidence of disease. a Patients who rescinded and refused surgery after completion of preoperative chemotherapy.

652

J. M. LOR ET AL.
TABLE 9. Medically inoperable patientsa (n 6)

Primary tumor site Larynx Larynx Larynx Hypopharynx Oropharynx Oropharynx

Regimen A A A B B B

Reason for inoperability Cardiac Cardiac Variousb Vascular insufficiency Cardiac and liver Cardiac and psychological

Alternative treatments RT RT RT RT RT RT

Outcome DOD DOC (NED) LFU (WD) DOC (NED) NED, alive LFU (WD)

Time (mo) 14 16 2 19 44 45

RT, radiotherapy; DOD, died of disease; DOC, died of other causes; LFU, lost to follow-up; WD, with disease; NED, no evidence of disease. a Patients found to be medically inoperable after completion of preoperative chemotherapy. b Electrolyte imbalance, dehydration, low hemoglobin, and so on.

specimens (from 26 patients) were involved with tumor and necessitated further resection. Local Control Oropharyngeal sites showed a significantly higher rate of local recurrence. This suggests that resection of a primary oropharyngeal neoplasm should be undertaken with a thorough evaluation of the extent of disease and potentially wider resection. In contrast, the low rate of

oral cavity recurrence may be due to more readily accomplished pretreatment evaluation of the extent of disease. Tattooing is more easily accomplished and may be based on inspection, palpation, and cross-sectional imaging studies. CONCLUSION A multidisciplinary management plan for LASCCHN involving (1) preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with a combination of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil; (2) surgical resection as the mainstay of treatment, uncompromised by tumor response to the chemotherapy; and (3) selective postoperative radiotherapy with defined indications seems to reduce the incidence of local recurrence, neck recurrence, and distant metastases and to improve survival. Pursuit of additional corroborative studies is recommended. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The acknowledgments are available online at www.annalssurgicaloncology.org. REFERENCES
1. Cachin Y, Eschwege F. Combination of radiotherapy and surgery in the treatment of head and neck cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 1975;2:17791. 2. Razack MS, Sako K, Marchetta F, et al. Carcinoma of the hypopharynx: success and failure. Am J Surg 1977;34:489 91. 3. Snow JB, Kramer S, Marcial VA, et al. Evaluation of randomized preoperative and postoperative radiation therapy of supraglottic carcinoma. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1978;87:686 91. 4. Arrigada R, Eschwege F, Cachin Y, et al. The value of combining radiotherapy with surgery in the treatment of hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancers. Cancer 1983;51:1819 25. 5. Kramer S, Gelber RD, Snow JB, et al. Combined radiation therapy and surgery in management of advanced head and neck cancer: final report of study 73-03 of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Head Neck Surg 1987;9:19 30. 6. Lundahl RE, Foote RL, Bonner JA, et al. Combined neck dissection and postoperative radiation therapy in the management of the

FIG. 5. Photomicrograph of viable tumor cells (4) deep to regenerated mucous membrane in patient who had a 90% response (stain, hematoxylin and eosin; magnification, low power).

Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003

PREOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY EVALUATION

high-risk neck: a matched pair analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;40:529 34. The Department of Veteran Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study Group. Induction chemotherapy plus radiation compared with surgery plus radiation in patients with advanced laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med 1991;324:168590. Urba SG, Wolf GT, Bradford CR, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy for organ preservation in head and neck cancer. Laryngoscope 2000; 110:2074 80. Kim S, Wu H-G, Heo D-S, Kim KH, Sung M-W, Park CI. Advanced hypopharyngeal carcinoma treatment results according to treatment modalities. Head Neck 2001;23:7137. Suntharalingam M, Haas ML, Van Echo DA, et al. Predictors for response and survival after concurrent chemotherapy and radiation for locally advanced squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Cancer 2001;91:548 54. Calais G, Alfonsi M, Bardet E, et al. Stage III and IV cancers of the oropharynx: results of a randomized study of GORTEC comparing radiotherapy alone with concomitant chemotherapy. Bull Cancer 2000;87(Spec No.):48 53. Tarplay JL, Chretien PB, Alexander JC, et al. High dose methotrexate as a preoperative adjuvant in the treatment of epidermoid carcinoma of the head and neck: a feasibility study and clinical trial. Am J Surg 1975;130:481 6. Wittes R, Heller K, Randolph V, et al. Cis-dichlorodiammineplatinum (11)-based chemotherapy as initial treatment of advanced head and neck cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1979;63:1533 8. Final report of the head and neck contracts program. Adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced head and neck squamous carcinoma. Cancer 1987;60:30111. Laramore GE, Scott CB, Al-Sarraf M, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: report on intergroup study 0034. Am J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1992;23:70513. Lor JM Jr, Diaz-Ordaz E, Spaulding M, et al. Improved survival with preoperative chemotherapy followed by resection uncompromised by tumor response for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Am J Surg 1995;170:506 11. National Institutes of Health. Management Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Welfare, 1979:117. Publication No. 80-2037.

653

7.

8. 9. 10.

11.

12.

13. 14. 15.

16.

17.

18. Harris EK, Albert A. Survivorship Analysis for Clinical Studies. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1991. 19. Anderson RN. United States Life Tables 1997. National Vital Statistics Reports. 47 No. 28. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 1999. 20. Lor JM Jr, Bonilla JA, Spaulding M, et al. Preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer. A surgical evaluation. J Surg Oncol Suppl 1989;1:2 6. 21. Lor JM Jr, Boulos EJ. Resection and reconstruction of the carotid artery in metastatic squamous cell carcinoma. Am J Surg 1981; 142:437 42. 22. Fung EK, Lor JM Jr. Randomized controlled trials for evaluating surgical questions. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128: 631 4. 23. Dejaeger E, Goethals P. Deglutition disorder as a late sequel of radiotherapy for a pharyngeal tumor. Am J Gastroenterol 1995;90: 4935. 24. Beauvillian C, Mabi M, Bourdin S, et al. Final results of a randomized trial comparing chemotherapy plus radiotherapy with chemotherapy plus surgery plus radiotherapy in locally advanced resectable hypopharyngeal carcinoma. Laryngoscope 1997;107: 648 78. 25. Marks SC. Surgical management of head and neck cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 1999;13 4:65578. 26. Jones AS, Bin Hanafi Z, Nadapalan V, et al. Do positive resection margins after ablative surgery for head and neck cancer adversely affect prognosis? A study of 352 patients with recurrent carcinoma following radiotherapy treated by salvage surgery. Br J Cancer 1996;74:128 32. 27. Forastiere A, Koch W, Trotti A, Sidransky D. Head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1890 900. 28. Hiotis SP, Weber SM, Cohen AM, et al. Assessing the predictive value of clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: an analysis of 488 patients. J Am Coll Surg 2002; 194:131 6. 29. Lee JG. Detection of residual carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx: a study of surgical margins. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1974;78:ORL49 53. 30. Jacobs JR, Ahmad K, Casiano R, et al. Implications of positive surgical margins. Laryngoscope 1993;103:64 8.

Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2003