Chintakuntlawar, Ashish V.

6071 Background: Phase III data suggests a benefit of HDC in the adjuvant setting, but the effect of HDC and WC on long term survival and for HPV+ HNSCC is unknown. Methods: Data from a published retrospective study (Geiger Oral Onc 2013) of HDC vs WC in resected HNSCC was updated. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) was assessed by Kaplan-Meier method for all pts and by HPV status. Multivariate analyses were performed to assess impact of HPV status, smoking, age, HDC vs WC, and cumulative cisplatin dose ( < 200mg/m2 vs ≥200 mg/m2). Results: 51 patients (pts) received HDC and 53 WC. Median follow-up was 8.7 yrs (0.8-13.7). For the whole cohort, HDC had significantly improved OS over WC (p = 0.0095; 5- and 10-yr OS 84% and 80% vs 72% and 60%). No OS benefit for HDC was seen in pts with HPV+HNSCC (5- and 10-yr OS 90% and 87% for HDC and 81% and 81% for WC; p = 0.51). For HPV-negative HNSCC, OS had borderline significance with HDC vs WC (5- and 10-yr OS 73% and 68% vs 65% and 44%; p = 0.06). For the whole cohort, there was no difference in 5- and 10-yr RFS (78% and 74% for HDC vs 72% and 62% for WC; p = 0.32). When analyzed by HPV status, there was no difference in RFS with HDC or WC for either HPV+ (p = 0.43) or HPV-negative HNSCC (p = 0.97). On multivariate analyses of OS for all pts, only HPV status was significant (p = 0.0011; HR 0.27, CI 0.12-0.62). For HPV+ HNSCC, there was no significant predictor of OS. For non-HPV HNSCC, the benefit of HDC approached significance with a decreased risk of death (HR 0.38; p = 0.07). For all pts, those who received ≥200mg/m2 had significantly improved OS (5-yr 90% vs 72% and 10-yr 86% vs 61%; p = 0.004). By HPV status, cumulative dose had no significant effect on OS. Conclusions: OS is better with HDC and with cumulative dose > 200 mg/m2 in unselected patients. The benefit of cisplatin is likely higher for non-HPV HNSCC. A difference in OS with no difference in RFS suggests non cancer-related causes of death in the WC cohort. Ability to receive HDC could be a surrogate marker of comorbidity. [Table: see text]

AbstractBackgroundPast research established that surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy (S + AR) improves overall survival (OS) in esthesioneuroblastoma (ENB). However, it is unknown if the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) further improves survival. The primary objective of this study was to compare survival among patients treated with S + AR alone to patients who underwent S + AR + AC.MethodsRetrospective review of patient records.ResultsThirty‐eight patients met inclusion criteria for either S + AR or S + AR + AC treatment groups. The S + AR + AC group contained more patients with Kadish stage D disease, dural invasion, and positive histologic margins postsurgery. All S + AR + AC patients received platinum‐based regimens, combined with etoposide in 67%. OS and recurrence‐free survival did not differ between the two groups, even when restricting the analysis to patients with Kadish stages B and C disease.ConclusionPatients who received platinum‐based AC did not exhibit improved survival compared to S + AR alone. Further investigation, preferably prospective, into the optimal use of systemic therapy in ENB is warranted.

e17529 Background: The immune system plays a major role in anti-tumor surveillance in healthy individuals. Immunosuppression after solid organ transplant prevents graft rejection, but leads to increased incidence of various malignancies including head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Outcomes of patients (pts) with post-transplant HNSCC are unknown. Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval, we retrospectively identified pts who developed HNSCC after solid organ transplant between 1995 and 2010. Adults with pathology-proven HNSCC and good follow up were included. Cutaneous cancers were excluded. Median overall survival (mOS) and progression free survival (mPFS) were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method. The prognostic effect of variables was studied with Cox proportional hazards models. Results: 33 pts met study inclusion criteria. The median time to HNSCC after transplant was 5.9 years. The primary site was the oral cavity in 15 pts, the oropharynx in 10, the larynx in 3, the hypopharynx in 2, the parotid in 2 and unknown in 1 pt. 58% of pts presented with locally advanced disease, 39% with localized disease and one pt with metastatic disease. 87% underwent upfront surgical resection. Of those, 66% received adjuvant therapy (38% radiation alone and 28% chemoradiation). 6% of pts had definitive chemoradiation. After a median follow up of 10.5 years, the 5-year OS rate was 45% and 37% for localized and locally advanced disease respectively. 75% of pts with oropharyngeal tumors were HPV-positive and they had better outcomes (5-year OS rate of 67%). The mPFS for the cohort was 22.8 months (95% CI; 11.6-50.1) with a median time to relapse of 15.2 months. The pattern of relapse was local in 69% of pts, distant in 25% and local plus distant in 6%. In a multivariate analysis, age > 60 years was a negative predictor of survival (HR 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 6.5; P = 0.03). Conclusions: This retrospective study evaluated the clinical course and outcomes of pts with non-cutaneous HNSCC after solid organ transplant. Pts had inferior survival compared to historical controls. older pts had poor prognosis. The risk of local and distant recurrence was high. HPV-positive oropharyngeal tumors continue to have better outcomes in this population.

6048 Background: The role of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) infection in non-oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (non-OPSCC) of the head and neck is unknown. Current available studies have yielded conflicting results due to limited number of patients. We present a large analysis from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) evaluating HPV-positive non-OPSCC. Methods: Using the NCDB registry, we included adults diagnosed with non-OPSCC from 2004-2012 with available HPV status. A cohort of patients with OPSCC was analyzed for HPV prevalence comparison. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method and stratified using HPV-status. The prognostic effect of variables was studied using Cox proportional hazards models. The JMP software was used for statistical analysis. Results: A total of 8726 non-OPSCC patients were identified and primary sites included the oral cavity (50%), larynx (41%) and hypopharynx (9%). 11% of non-OPSCC patients had evidence of infection with high-risk HPV strains compared to 61% of OPSCC patients. HPV-positive non-OPSCC patients presented at slightly younger age, had more advanced stage and higher tumor grade compared to HPV-negative patients (P < 0.01). HPV-positive non-OPSCC patients had better survival than HPV-negative patients (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.93, P < 0.01) and this was most pronounced in patients with locally advanced disease (5-year survival 50% versus 40%, HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.6-0.8, P < 0.01). A univariate and multivariate analysis were performed adjusting for age, sex, race, stage, primary site, Charlson/Deyo comorbidity score, financial income, tumor grade, surgery, radiation and chemotherapy administration. Smoking history was unavailable. HPV positivity was an independent predictor of better survival in non-OPSCC in multivariate analysis (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.8, P < 0.01). Conclusions: HPV infection is seen in a subset of patients with non-OPSCC head and neck cancer and these present with more advanced tumors. The survival of patients with HPV-positive non-OPSCC is significantly better than HPV-negative tumors. Routine HPV testing and enrollment in treatment de-intensification clinical trials similar to OPSCC might be appropriate for this patient population.