Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Aug 1;38(22):2552-2557.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.00056. Epub 2020 Jun 4.

De-Escalation After DE-ESCALATE and RTOG 1016: A Head and Neck Cancer InterGroup Framework for Future De-Escalation Studies

Affiliations
Review

De-Escalation After DE-ESCALATE and RTOG 1016: A Head and Neck Cancer InterGroup Framework for Future De-Escalation Studies

Hisham Mehanna et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) is increasing rapidly. The younger age, significantly improved prognosis, and relative morbidity of the standard-of-care cisplatin and radiotherapy in this population have led to the popularization of the concept of treatment de-escalation. The recent results of the first 3 randomized de-escalation trials, however, have shown a clear detriment in survival when cisplatin is omitted or substituted. In view of these results, the Head and Neck Cancer International Group identified the need to issue guidance regarding future de-escalation studies for patients with HPV-positive head and neck cancer to avoid the possibility of patients being harmed. We review the current state of the literature regarding HPV de-escalation trials and present a framework and guidance on future and existing clinical trials for treatment de-escalation of HPV-positive OPC. De-escalation paradigms of HPV-positive OPC should be evaluated in phase II studies, and results should be awaited before proceeding to phase III studies. Implementation into clinical practice before high-level evidence is available should not be undertaken in this context. Finally, harm-minimization techniques should also be evaluated as an alternative to de-escalation of treatment in these patient groups.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG 1.
FIG 1.
(A) Progression-free and (B) overall survival of the RTOG1016 trial. (C) Time to all recurrences and (D) overall survival of the DE-ESCALATE trial. HR, hazard ratio; IMRT, intensity-modulated radiation therapy; RT, radiotherapy.

References

    1. Ang K, Zhang Q, Wheeler R, et al: A phase III trial (RTOG 0129) of two radiation-cisplatin regimens for head and neck carcinomas (HNC): Impact of radiation and cisplatin intensity on outcome. J Clin Oncol 28, 2010 (abstr 5507)
    1. Ang KK, Harris J, Wheeler R, et al. Human papillomavirus and survival of patients with oropharyngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:24–35. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Trotti A, Pajak TF, Gwede CK, et al: TAME: Development of a new method for summarising adverse events of cancer treatment by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Lancet Oncol 8:613-624, 2007. - PubMed
    1. Denis F, Garaud P, Bardet E, et al: Late toxicity results of the GORTEC 94-01 randomized trial comparing radiotherapy with concomitant radiochemotherapy for advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma: Comparison of LENT/SOMA, RTOG/EORTC, and NCI-CTC scoring systems. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 55:93-98, 2003. - PubMed
    1. List MA, Stracks J, Colangelo L, et al: How do head and neck cancer patients prioritize treatment outcomes before initiating treatment? J Clin Oncol 18:877, 2000. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms