Clinicopathological Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in Patients with Laryngeal Cancer

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background: Various factors can affect the survival of patients with laryngeal cancer (LC). In this retrospective study, we assessed clinicopathological features, their prognostic value, and treatment modalities for patients with confirmed squamous cell LC. Methods: We collected patient data on demographics, clinicopathological characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional control (LRC). We assessed survival using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression model analyses of potential prognostic parameters. Results: After a median follow-up of 76 months, 28 (33.3%) patients had a recurrence. The median OS was 78 months, with an event recorded in 50% of patients. The DSS median was not reached (NR) with a survival rate of 72.6%, the DFS survival rate was 66.7% with median NR, and the LRC survival rate was 72.6% with median NR. After conducting a multivariate analysis of significant variables, we found that only recurrence and lymphatic invasion had an independent effect on OS and recurrence in DSS, while subsite impacted DFS and LRC. Conclusions: Survival trends were consistent with other studies, except for OS. Recurrence, lymphatic invasion, and subsite location were significant factors that impacted patient survival.

Related collections

Most cited references 38

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

E A Eisenhauer, P Therasse, J. Bogaerts … (2009)

Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.

0 comments Cited 5683 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Cancer statistics, 2016.

Rebecca L Siegel, Kimberly D Miller, Ahmedin Jemal (2016)

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data were collected by the National Cancer Institute (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] Program), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (National Program of Cancer Registries), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2016, 1,685,210 new cancer cases and 595,690 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Overall cancer incidence trends (13 oldest SEER registries) are stable in women, but declining by 3.1% per year in men (from 2009-2012), much of which is because of recent rapid declines in prostate cancer diagnoses. The cancer death rate has dropped by 23% since 1991, translating to more than 1.7 million deaths averted through 2012. Despite this progress, death rates are increasing for cancers of the liver, pancreas, and uterine corpus, and cancer is now the leading cause of death in 21 states, primarily due to exceptionally large reductions in death from heart disease. Among children and adolescents (aged birth-19 years), brain cancer has surpassed leukemia as the leading cause of cancer death because of the dramatic therapeutic advances against leukemia. Accelerating progress against cancer requires both increased national investment in cancer research and the application of existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population.

0 comments Cited 1887 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2017

Christina Fitzmaurice, Degu Abate, Naghmeh Abbasi … (2020)

This systematic analysis describes cancer burden for 29 cancer groups across 195 countries from 1990 through 2017 to provide data needed for cancer control planning.