Oncologic Significance of Therapeutic Delays in Patients with Oral Cavity Cancer

Gabriel S. Dayan, Houda Bahig, Stephanie Johnson-Obaseki, Antoine Eskander, Xinyuan Hong, Shamir Chandarana, John R. De Almeida, Anthony C. Nichols, Michael Hier, Mathieu Belzile, Marc Gaudet, Joseph Dort, T. Wayne Matthews, Robert Hart, David P. Goldstein, Christopher M.K.L. Yao, Ali Hosni, Danielle MacNeil, James Fowler, Kevin HigginsCarlos Khalil, Mark Khoury, Alex M. Mlynarek, Gregoire Morand, Khalil Sultanem, Anastasios Maniakas, Tareck Ayad, Apostolos Christopoulos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Oral cavity cancer often requires multidisciplinary management, subjecting patients to complex therapeutic trajectories. Prolonged treatment intervals in oral cavity cancer have been associated with poor oncological outcomes, but there has yet to be a study investigating treatment times in Canada. OBJECTIVE To report treatment delays for patients with oral cavity cancer in Canada and evaluate the outcomes of treatment delays on overall survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter cohort studywas performed at 8 Canadian academic centers from 2005 to 2019. Participants were patients with oral cavity cancer who underwent surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy. Analysis was performed in January 2023. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Treatment intervals evaluatedwere surgery to initiation of postoperative radiation therapy interval (S-PORT) and radiation therapy interval (RTI). The exposure variables were prolonged intervals, respectively defined as index S-PORT greater than 42 days and RTI greater than 46 days. Patient demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index, smoking status, alcohol status, and cancer staging were also considered. Univariate (log rank and Kaplan-Meier) and multivariate (Cox regression) analyses were performed to determine associations with overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, 1368 patients were included; median (IQR) age at diagnosis was 61 (54-70) years, and 896 (65%) were men. Median (IQR) S-PORT was 56 (46-68) days, with 1093 (80%) patients waiting greater than 42 days, and median (IQR) RTI was 43 (41-47) days, with 353 (26%) patients having treatment time interval greater than 46 days. There were variations in treatment time intervals between institutions for S-PORT (institution with longest vs shortest median S-PORT, 64 days vs 48 days; η2 = 0.023) and RTI (institution with longest vs shortest median RTI, 44 days vs 40 days; η2 = 0.022). Median follow-up was 34 months. The 3-year OS was 68%. In univariate analysis, patients with prolonged S-PORT had worse survival at 3 years (66%vs 77%; odds ratio 1.75; 95%CI, 1.27-2.42), whereas prolonged RTI (67%vs 69%; odds ratio 1.06; 95%CI, 0.81-1.38) was not associated with OS. Other factors associated with OS were age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, alcohol status, T category, N category, and institution. In the multivariate model, prolonged S-PORT remained independently associated with OS (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95%CI, 1.07-1.80). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this multicenter cohort study of patients with oral cavity cancer requiring multimodal therapy, initiation of radiation therapy within 42 days from surgery was associated with improved survival. However, in Canada, only a minority completed S-PORT within the recommended time, whereas most had an appropriate RTI. An interinstitution variation existed in terms of treatment time intervals. Institutions should aim to identify reasons for delays in their respective centers, and efforts and resources should be directed toward achieving timely completion of S-PORT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)961-969
Number of pages9
JournalJAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
Volume149
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 9 2023

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Oncologic Significance of Therapeutic Delays in Patients with Oral Cavity Cancer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this