Price, Katharine A.

Abstract Objective To describe the presenting symptoms, treatment regimens, and outcomes associated with oropharyngeal adenoid cystic carcinoma. Data Sources Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus via Elsevier. Review Methods This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses. A medical librarian conducted the literature search using controlled vocabulary and keywords, with investigator input. Eligible articles were clinical trials and observational studies reporting on clinical features, treatment, or outcomes for oropharyngeal adenoid cystic carcinoma. Results Our search identified 233 unique citations, with 44 articles included covering 195 patients. The female‐to‐male ratio was 1.7:1, and the base of the tongue was the most common subsite (73%). Presenting symptoms were mainly pain/discomfort (n = 31), followed by a palpable mass (n = 19) and dysphagia (n = 12). At diagnosis, 22.3% (29 patients) had positive lymph nodes. Treatment was primarily surgical (n = 102), with definitive radiation therapy used in 58 cases. Disease progression was noted in 86 patients, 36% (n = 31) of whom developed distant metastases—primarily to the lungs (n = 26). Long‐term outcomes (n = 76) showed 3‐ and 5‐year overall survival rates of 71.5% to 100% and 47.6% to 79.0%, and disease‐free survival rates of 54.7% to 70.0% and 21.9% to 44.0%, respectively. Conclusion Among patients with available data, oropharyngeal adenoid cystic carcinoma appeared more common in women and has a predilection for the base of the tongue. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution, given the high proportion of missing data. These tumors appear to carry a higher risk for nodal metastases and may lead to poor outcomes.

Importance Decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) aim to increase trial access for underrepresented populations (URP) and ensure study outcomes, conclusions, and policy-related decisions are applicable to diverse populations. Objective To assess trends in the percentage of accrued participants from more than 120 miles from the research site upon DCT program implementation. Design, Setting, and Participants This descriptive quality improvement study was conducted from January 2024 to March 2025 at Mayo Clinic, a US multiregional, academic medical center (AMC) comprising 3 sites and an affiliated, community-based health care system. All individuals who consented and/or accrued to an institutional review board–approved clinical trial were included. Exposure DCTs are defined as trials with at least 1 decentralized capability beyond remote consent. DCT program development began July 2022. By January 2024, remote consent, video telehealth visits, remote phlebotomy, and device services were implemented across all sites and departments. Remote monitoring and oral medication delivery were available on a limited basis. Prospective automated program and DCT participant data collection and quarterly reporting began in January 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures Percentage of all DCT accrued participants with a residential zip code more than 120 miles from 1 of 3 AMC sites. Results There were 7469 participants (median [IQR] age, 62 [51-70] years; 3594 [48.1%] female; 241 [3.2%] Asian, 391 [5.2%] Black or African American, and 6347 [85.0%] White individuals) accrued to 765 DCTs. During the study period, the percentage of DCT participants residing more than 120 miles from an AMC site ranged from 18.9% in the first quarter (Q1) of 2024 (383 of 2032 participants) to 29.6% in Q1 of 2025 (346 of 1170 participants). Of those accrued, 1147 (15.4%) were of a racial or ethnic URP, ranging from 12.5% in Q1 of 2024 (253 participants) to 17.4% in Q1 of 2025 (204 participants). There were 1554 (20.8%) participants from a rural location, ranging from 16.6% in Q1 of 2024 (338 participants) to 24.9% in Q1 of 2025 (291 participants). Additionally, by geospatial distance from an AMC site, the male-to-female ratio was nearly 50:50, and the age distribution appeared similar. Conclusions and Relevance In this quality improvement study of a DCT program implementation, DCT accruals trended favorably among those residing more than 120 miles from an AMC site and those of rural or URP populations. While these findings cannot be directly attributed to program implementation, they are reassuring that this strategy may address some barriers to clinical trial access. Future studies should assess the sustained effectiveness and scalability of DCT models in improving equitable trial access.

Importance Standard adjuvant therapy for human papillomavirus–associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-OPSCC) is radiation therapy 60 Gy with or without cisplatin delivered in 30 fractions during 6 weeks. A phase 3 randomized clinical trial demonstrated decreased toxic effects and improved patient-reported outcomes with de-escalated adjuvant radiation therapy (DART) compared with standard therapy; however, outcomes for patients treated in the clinical practice setting following trial adoption remain unknown. Objective To compare characteristics and oncologic outcomes of patients treated with DART during clinical trials (on study) and in clinical practice settings (off study) and report progression-free survival (PFS) by risk category. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective cohort study included patients treated with DART in the MC1273 and MC1675 trials and in clinical practice after study completion at a multisite tertiary care center. Patients with surgically resectable HPV-OPSCC who underwent margin-negative resection between August 20, 2013, and March 21, 2023, and were treated with DART were included in the analysis. Those with prior head and neck cancer, pT0 or pT4 disease, unknown HPV status, metastatic disease at presentation, synchronous primary tumors, induction chemotherapy, or treatment at an outside institution were excluded. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2024, to July 18, 2025. Interventions DART consisting of 30 to 36 Gy in 1.5- to 1.8-Gy fractions twice daily with docetaxel 15 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8. Main Outcomes and Measures Progression-free survival as measured via Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results A total of 282 patients were included in the analysis: 176 (62.4%) in the on-study group and 106 (37.6%) in the off-study group (252 [89.4%] male; mean [SD] age, 59.1 [9.3] years). Both groups were predominantly male (157 [89.2%] and 95 [89.6%], respectively) and consisted mostly of never smokers (118 [67.0%] and 62 [58.5%], respectively). Pathologic features were similar between groups except for nodal stage (pN1: 155 [88.1%] on study vs 102 [96.2%] off study; pN2: 21 [11.9%] on study vs 4 [3.8%] off study; P = .02). The median follow-up times were 5.2 years (95% CI, 5.2-5.8 years) in the on-study group and 2.2 years (95% CI, 1.9-2.4 years) in the off-study group. Two-year PFS was similar (93% [95% CI, 88%-97%] on study vs 93% [95% CI, 88%-99%] off study). For patients with pN1 and no extranodal extension (ENE), 2- and 5-year PFS were 97% (95% CI, 93%-100%) and 96% (95% CI, 92%-100%), respectively. Patients with pN1 and ENE had a 2- and 5-year PFS of 93% (95% CI, 89%-98%) and 87% (95% CI, 81%-94%), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this retrospective cohort study of patients receiving DART on and off study, oncologic outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. Fewer patients with pN2 received DART off study, given the interim results of MC1675. Patients with pN1 and no ENE treated with DART had excellent 2- and 5-year PFS, supporting DART as a compelling treatment option in well-selected patients. An additional study that is currently underway will evaluate biomarker risk-stratified treatment of patients with pN1 and ENE receiving DART.