Mouth Cancer Foundation, Mouth Cancer Awareness

donate online
 
 Return to main web site (leave the Online Support Group)   |   To support the Mouth Cancer Foundation, you can now make online donations!
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Neck Treatment (Efficacy)
 Login/Join 
Picture of Dr Vinod K Joshi
Posted
Efficacy of neck treatment in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Buck G, Huguenin P, Stoeckli SJ.
Spital Zollikerberg, Department of Internal Medicine, Zollikerberg, Switzerland.


from Head Neck. 2007 Jul 16; [Epub ahead of print]
quote:

BACKGROUND: Treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) addresses the primary tumor and the lymphatic drainage. Modalities for the neck are neck dissection and/or radiation therapy. In most cases, the neck is treated by the modality that seems more appropriate for the primary. The aim of this study was to analyze the results of the neck treatments either by neck dissection alone, by radiation therapy alone or by neck dissection followed by radiation therapy.

METHODS: This was a retrospective chart analysis of 699 patients treated for a previously untreated HNSCC. The primary endpoint was recurrence at the treated neck. RESULTS.: Two hundred eighty-one (40%) patients underwent primary neck irradiation, 219 (31%) neck dissection alone, and 199 (29%) neck dissection followed by adjuvant irradiation.

The 5-year regional control rates:
  • after neck dissection alone were 83% for pN0, 75% for pN1, 60% for pN2a, 59% for pN2b, and 50% for pN2c;
  • after radiation alone, 89% for cN0, 87% for cN1, 40% for cN2a, 60% for cN2b, and 48% for cN2c; and
  • after neck dissection with adjuvant radiation, 86% for pN0, 96% for pN1, 100% for pN2a, 88% for pN2b, and 88% for pN2c.


CONCLUSIONS: Radiation or neck dissection alone are efficient to control early neck disease. For advanced N2/3 neck disease, neck dissection followed by adjuvant radiation is highly efficient, whereas primary radiation results in a high number of regional failures. The literature suggests planned neck dissection to improve regional control for these patients.

I would be interested in our members experiences of treatment received, as these problems may not be getting the management deserved. The poll below will help outline the extent of the problem. Thanks.

Question:
Did you have a neck dissection?

Choices:
Yes
No

Question:
Did you have neck radiotherapy?

Choices:
Yes
No

Question:
Did you have a neck dissection followed by radiotherapy?

Choices:
Yes
No

 


Disclaimer: Please see your own dentist/doctor for a proper diagnosis as my words should not, in any circumstances, be taken as dental/medical advice.

"If you see what is small as it sees itself, and accept what is weak for what strength it has, and use what is dim for the light it gives, then all will go well. This is called Acting Naturally."
Lao-Tsu, Tao Teh King
 
Posts: 3779 | Location: St Luke's Hospital, Bradford and Pinderfields Hospital, Wakefield | Registered: 14 December 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of Paul
Posted Hide Post
The problem for me was did not get told what was going on and whil;e having R/T had npo contact with my consultant and even though I was in pain and swollen they carried on pushing my face into the dam mask.

Paul
 
Posts: 835 | Location: London England | Registered: 06 March 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of Julia
Posted Hide Post
I think I'm a bit of a rarity--I had surgery (hemiglossectomy & free-flap resection) but didn't need radiation or chemo. No one was more surprised by that turn of events than my doctor. My tumor was pretty big (2.9 cm), but it was encapsulated and the 50+ lymph nodes they took out were all cancer free. So far, three years later I'm still cancer free.


Howdilly doodilly, survivorinos!
 
Posts: 830 | Location: Hollywood on the Huron | Registered: 15 February 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
: Laryngoscope. 2007 Dec;117(12):2129-34. Links
Deferring planned neck dissection following chemoradiation for stage IV head and neck cancer: the utility of PET-CT.

Nayak JV, Walvekar RR, Andrade RS, Daamen N, Lai SY, Argiris A, Smith RP, Heron DE, Ferris RL, Johnson JT, Branstetter BF 4th.
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET-CT) may be of value in deferring planned neck dissections for patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). STUDY DESIGN: Observational study of patients with de novo cervical > or =N2 regional spread of HNSCC in a tertiary care academic medical center. METHODS: Forty-three patients were identified who underwent post-treatment PET-CT within 6 months of completing neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with radiation therapy (CRT). The PET-CT was "positive" if the radiologist recommended tissue sampling or resection of cervical lymph nodes, or if there was progressive neck disease in the setting of distant metastatic disease. Patients who had positive PET-CT underwent confirmatory biopsy given clinical suspicion for regional cervical metastasis without distant disease. Patients with negative PET-CT were followed clinically and radiographically for a minimum of 5 months (median 18.1 months) after CRT. RESULTS: Ten (22%) of the 43 post-treatment PET-CT studies were positive. Seven of the 10 PET-CT scans (70% of positives) were true-positive given histologically-confirmed residual viable tumor or progressive disease including disease in the neck. The 3 remaining studies (30% of positives) were false-positive PET-CT results, given resolution of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) avidity on subsequent imaging or tissue sampling demonstrating absence of viable tumor cells. Of the 33 patients with negative PET-CTs in the neck, 1 patient had absence of FDG-avidity in the setting of malignant disease in the neck (3% false negatives); otherwise, patients with an initially negative PET-CT scan had no recurrences during the study (97% true negatives). This corresponds to a sensitivity of 87.5% (7/8), a specificity of 91% (32/35), a positive predictive value of 70% (7/10), a negative predictive value of 97% (32/33), and accuracy of 91% (39/43) for PET-CT scans in the detection of cervical metastatic disease after CRT. Overall, 37 (86%) of 43 patients were spared neck dissection using this technology without evidence of recurrent disease in the neck at extended follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that planned neck dissection after CRT for HNSCC may be deferred in favor of serial PET-CT imaging, and that sampling of areas of suspicious FDG-avid uptake can be rationally considered prior to therapeutic neck dissection. These data also suggest that negative PET-CT scans are highly reliable for the absence of residual cervical nodal disease
 
Posts: 323 | Location: Brighton | Registered: 26 October 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
Neck dissection in the combined-modality therapy of patients with locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer.
Abstract PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of neck lymph node (ND) in the combined dissection modality therapy for locoregionally advanced head and neck. METHODS: We identified patients with N2-N3 head and neck cancers who were enrolled in three consecutive multicenter phase II studies of concurrent chemoradiotherapy utilizing 5-fluorouracil and hydroxyurea on an alternate-week schedule with radiotherapy twice daily plus either cisplatin (C-FHX) or paclitaxel (T-FHX). Patients with unknown primary tumors, nasopharyngeal or paranasal sinus primaries, nonsquamous histology, progression or death during therapy, or incomplete therapy were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients were analyzed. Seventy-nine percent had N2 stage. ND was performed in 92 patients (70%), either prior to enrollment (n = 31) or after chemoradiotherapy (n = 61). With a median follow-up of 4.6 years, the 5-year locoregional and neck progression-free survival (PFS) rates were higher in patients with ND versus patients without ND: 88% versus 74% (p =.02) and 99% versus 82% (p =.0007). respectively; there was also a trend toward improved overall survival (OS) with ND, but PFS and distant PFS were comparable. In the subset of patients with N3 disease, ND was associated not only with better locoregional control but also with improved distant PFS. However, in patients with clinical complete response (n = 92), no significant differences in PFS (68% vs 75% at 5 years, p =.53) or any other survival parameters with or without ND were observed. CONCLUSIONS: ND improves neck control and is required for patients with clinically residual disease or N3 neck cancer but has no significant impact on the outcome of patients with N2 stage disease who are rendered clinically disease-free with intensive concurrent chemoradiotherapy.
Authors Athanassios Argiris, Kerstin M Stenson, Bruce E Brockstein, Bharat B Mittal, Harold Pelzer, Merrill S Kies, Prathima Jayaram, Louis Portugal, Barry L Wenig, Fred R Rosen, Daniel J Haraf, Everett E Vokes (Affiliation: The Feinberg School of Medicine and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA. a-argiris at northwestern.edu)
Journal Head & neck (Head Neck) Vol. 26 Issue 5 Pg. 447-55 (May 2004) ISSN: 1043-3074 United States
PMID 15122662 (Publication Type: Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.)
 
Posts: 323 | Location: Brighton | Registered: 26 October 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
N2-N3 neck nodal control without planned neck dissection for clinical/radiologic complete responders - Results of Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group Study 98.02

June Corry, MB, BS 1 2 *, Lester Peters, MD 1 2, Richard Fisher, PhD 2 3, Andrew Macann, MB, BS 4, Michael Jackson, MB, BChir 5, Bev McClure, BSc (Hons) 3, Danny Rischin, MD 2 6
1Division of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
2University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
3Centre for Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
4Department of Radiation Oncology, Auckland Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
5Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia
6Division of Haematology and Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia

email: June Corry (june.corry@petermac.org)

*Correspondence to June Corry, Division of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia

Funded by:
Sanofi-Aventis

Keywords
concurrent chemoradiation • head and neck cancer • neck dissection • neck management


Abstract

Background
The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of isolated nodal failure in patients with N2/3 disease who achieved a complete clinical and radiological response (CR) at 12 weeks postchemoradiation, when no planned neck dissection was performed.

Methods
We analyzed the nodal response and subsequent neck control of 102 patients with initial N2/3 disease treated on the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 98.02 study.

Results
With a median 4.3 years follow-up, the patterns of first failure in the CR patients were local 4%, local and nodal 2%, distant 28%, and locoregional plus distant (within 1 month) 6%.There were no patients who had only neck failure.

Conclusion
Patients in this trial with N2/3 disease who obtained a clinical and radiological complete response to chemoradiation had a zero incidence of isolated neck failure without a planned neck dissection. The continued use of planned neck dissections in this patient subset cannot be justified. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2008
 
Posts: 323 | Location: Brighton | Registered: 26 October 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
Hi Cathy

Just read your posting really interesting, I too had tonsil cancer T1 N1, had the neck D, am doing OK, however the neck D is never without problems, back pain, neck pain, shoulder pain etc.

Would I have elected to have it knowing what I know now the answer would be no, I would have to be given a dam good reason to have it done.

Regards

Tony
 
Posts: 222 | Location: Barton upon Humber | Registered: 26 March 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of cookey
Posted Hide Post
The best reason for having it done,is that its the only way they can check out the dozens of lymph nodes in the neck,and they are the most likely way the cancer cells spread to the chest and the brain.
liz


Love liz

Never take your eye off the ball it may just smack you in the mouth
 
Posts: 669 | Location: Harewood West Yorkshire | Registered: 19 February 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of Trev
Posted Hide Post
Hi! Cathy,
I too would have had second thoughts had I known what I was going to put up with Post OP BUT Post Post OP I would have still gone down the road and had the Op But by waiting it would have been maybe too late and what discomfort I am putting up with would have been worth it for the extended life that the Op gave me, Yes I know that there iare some rather crappy side effects but to be able to see my Grandchids is worth the discomfort.
Love Trev
 
Posts: 393 | Location: Willaston Sth Australia Australia | Registered: 09 July 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of cookey
Posted Hide Post
Robin had a bilateral(radical one side and modified the other side)neck dissection.He was in surgery for 8 hours, had a 4cm tumour removed from his parotid gland and 67 lymph nodes removedfrom his neck.He had two neck drains and 58 staples from one ear to the other.He was home in 48 hours and down the pub for a pint 4 hours later.Staples out in 10 days and back at work in a fortnight.This operation was the least problematical part of his whole treatment.


Love liz

Never take your eye off the ball it may just smack you in the mouth
 
Posts: 669 | Location: Harewood West Yorkshire | Registered: 19 February 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of Dr Vinod K Joshi
Posted Hide Post
Upper limb dysfunction following selective neck dissection: A retrospective questionnaire study.
Head Neck. 2009 Mar 3. [Epub ahead of print]
Carr SD, Bowyer D, Cox G.
ENT Department, Leeds General Infirmary, Great George Street, Leeds LS1 3EX, United Kingdom.

quote:


Upper limb dysfunction following selective neck dissection: A retrospective questionnaire study.

  • BACKGROUND: To determine total upper limb function following selective neck dissection over a mean follow-up of 1.6 years.
  • METHODS: A retrospective questionnaire study in a tertiary head and neck surgical unit. One hundred forty-eight patients who underwent selective neck dissection for head and neck cancer from January 2000 to December 2005 were invited to participate. The main outcome measure was ipsilateral upper limb dysfunction as measured by the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.
  • RESULTS: Sixty-five patients responded to the invitation to join the study from 148 invited. Despite accessory nerve conserving surgery for all the selective neck dissections studied, 23% reported no upper limb dysfunction, 54% reported mild upper limb dysfunction, 15% reported moderate, and 8% reported a severe dysfunction.
  • CONCLUSIONS: Long-term upper limb dysfunction is common following nerve preserving surgery. The DASH questionnaire is a useful preoperative and postoperative clinical tool for those patients undergoing selective neck dissections.



Please take our patient poll on Morbidity of the neck after head and neck cancer therapy if you haven't already done so, thanks.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dr Vinod K Joshi,


Disclaimer: Please see your own dentist/doctor for a proper diagnosis as my words should not, in any circumstances, be taken as dental/medical advice.

"If you see what is small as it sees itself, and accept what is weak for what strength it has, and use what is dim for the light it gives, then all will go well. This is called Acting Naturally."
Lao-Tsu, Tao Teh King
 
Posts: 3779 | Location: St Luke's Hospital, Bradford and Pinderfields Hospital, Wakefield | Registered: 14 December 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of Dr Vinod K Joshi
Posted Hide Post
Elective neck dissection in oral carcinoma: a critical review of the evidence
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2007 Jun;27(3):113-7
Kowalski LP, Sanabria A.
Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Otorhinolaryngology, Hospital do Cancer AC Camargo, Sao Paulo, Brazil
quote:
More than 50% of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity have lymph node metastases and histological confirmation of metastatic disease is the most important prognostic factor. Among patients with a clinically negative neck, the incidence of occult metastases varies with the site, size and thickness of the primary tumour.

The high incidence rate of occult cervical metastases (> 20%) in tumours of the lower part of the oral cavity is the main argument in favour of elective treatment of the neck. The usual treatment of patients with clinically palpable metastatic lymph nodes has been radical neck dissection. This classical surgical procedure involves not only resection of level I to V lymph nodes of the neck but also the tail of the parotid, submandibular gland, sternocleidomastoid muscle, internal jugular vein and spinal accessory nerve. It is a safe oncological surgical procedure that significantly reduces the risk of regional recurrences, however it produces significant post-operative morbidity, mainly shoulder dysfunction.

Aiming to reduce morbidity, Ward and Roben described a modification of the procedure sparing the spinal accessory nerve to prevent post-operative shoulder morbidity. Several clinical and pathological studies have demonstrated that the pattern of metastatic lymph node metastases occurs in a predictable fashion in patients with oral and oropharyngeal carcinoma. The use of selective supraomohyoid neck dissection as the elective treatment of the neck, in oral cancer patients, is now well established. However, its role in the treatment of clinically positive neck patients is controversial.

Some authors advocate this type of selective neck dissection in patients with limited neck disease at the upper levels of the neck, without jeopardizing neck control. The main factors supporting this approach are the usually good prognosis in patients with single levels I or II metastasis independent of the extent of neck dissection, and the low rates of level V involvement in oral cavity tumours. Furthermore, the high incidence of clinically false-positive lymph nodes in oral cavity cancer patients is well recognized. In selected cases, supraomohyoid dissection could be extended to level IV, and followed by radiotherapy when indicated.

Several reports have confirmed the usefulness of minimally invasive sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma and breast tumours. However, only preliminary data testing the feasibility of the method exist regarding the management of oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. The complexity of lymphatic drainage and the presence of deep lymphatics of the neck make application of this method difficult. This attractive concept has recently been explored by several investigators who examined the feasibility of identifying the sentinel lymph node in primary echelons of drainage from oral cavity squamous carcinoma. The current knowledge of sentinel lymph node biopsy does not allow avoiding the indication of elective neck dissection in clinical practice. Sentinel lymph node biopsy cannot be considered the standard of care at this time. However, there are multi-institutional clinical trials testing this approach.

Management of occult neck node metastasis continues to be a matter of debate. The role of imaging methods such as ultrasound-guided needle biopsy, sentinel node biopsy and positron emission tomography-computed tomography are still being evaluated as alternatives to elective neck dissections. Whether one of these techniques will change the current management of cervical node metastasis remains to be proved in prospective multi-institutional trials.


Disclaimer: Please see your own dentist/doctor for a proper diagnosis as my words should not, in any circumstances, be taken as dental/medical advice.

"If you see what is small as it sees itself, and accept what is weak for what strength it has, and use what is dim for the light it gives, then all will go well. This is called Acting Naturally."
Lao-Tsu, Tao Teh King
 
Posts: 3779 | Location: St Luke's Hospital, Bradford and Pinderfields Hospital, Wakefield | Registered: 14 December 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
I want to reply at length as the neck dissection issues has been of great to concern to me and I have done quite a bit of research that reveals the extent of the controversy over treatment amongst researchers and oncologists at the moment. Unfortunately, I don't have time today, but here are the details of a multi center trial in the UK that is looking at whether patients who have clear PET/CT scans 12 weeks after treatment can be spared a neck dissection.

Although my partner is not part of a trial, he had a clear scan 12 weeks following chemoradiation and has decided not to have a radical neck dissection which does worry me as he didn't take the decision after doing much research. But in someways he may be an odd case as he was dignosed following an exision of a suspected branchial cyst and when he had a PETCT scan to identify his primary prior to treatment - in a tonsil, he had a 'clinically clear' neck. Neverthelesss I find it difficult not to worry about the possibility of DM...

http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/t...eatment=0&location=0
 
Posts: 323 | Location: Brighton | Registered: 26 October 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Picture of Dr Vinod K Joshi
Posted Hide Post
Of 37 participants so far:
  • 28 or 76% had a neck dissection
  • 25 or 68% had neck radiotherapy
  • 21 or 57% had a neck dissection followed by radiotherapy


Disclaimer: Please see your own dentist/doctor for a proper diagnosis as my words should not, in any circumstances, be taken as dental/medical advice.

"If you see what is small as it sees itself, and accept what is weak for what strength it has, and use what is dim for the light it gives, then all will go well. This is called Acting Naturally."
Lao-Tsu, Tao Teh King
 
Posts: 3779 | Location: St Luke's Hospital, Bradford and Pinderfields Hospital, Wakefield | Registered: 14 December 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Mouth Cancer Foundation is a registered charity No. 1109298.
Registered as a company limited by guarantee in England & Wales No. 5154295.
Copyright © 2002-2009 Dr Vinod K Joshi BDS DRDRCS FDSRCPS. All Rights Reserved.