OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of surgery of the primary tumor site in the management of primary major salivary gland cancer.
METHODS: The French Network of Rare Head and Neck Tumors (REFCOR) formed a steering group, which drafted a non-systematic narrative review of the literature published on Medline, and proposed recommendations. The level of adherence to the recommendations was then assessed by a rating group, according to the formal consensus method.
RESULTS: Treatment of salivary gland tumor is mainly surgical. The gold standard for parotid cancer is a total parotidectomy, to obtain clear margins and remove all intraparotid lymph nodes. For low-grade tumors, partial parotidectomy with wide excision of the tumor is acceptable in the case of postoperative diagnosis on definitive histology. In the event of positive margins on definitive analysis, revision surgery should be assessed for feasibility, and performed if possible.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of primary major salivary gland cancer is based on surgery with clear resection margins, as far away as possible from the tumor. The type of surgery depends on tumor location, pathologic type and extension.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the indications for neck dissection in the management of parotid, submandibular or minor salivary gland cancers depending on the clinical situation: i.e., clinical lymph node involvement (cN+) or not (cN0); low or high risk of occult nodal metastasis; diagnosis of malignancy before, during or after surgery.
METHODS: The French Network of Rare Head and Neck Tumors (REFCOR) formed a steering group which drafted a narrative review of the literature published on Medline and proposed recommendations. The level of adherence to the recommendations was then assessed by a rating group according to the formal consensus method.
RESULTS: In cN+ salivary gland cancer, ipsilateral neck dissection is recommended. In cN0 salivary gland cancer, ipsilateral neck dissection is recommended, except for tumors at low risk of occult nodal metastasis. If definitive pathology reveals a high risk of occult nodal involvement, additional neck treatment is recommended: ipsilateral neck dissection or elective nodal irradiation.
CONCLUSIONS: The rate of occult lymph node involvement, and therefore the indication for elective neck dissection, depends primarily on the pathologic grade of the salivary gland cancer.

BACKGROUND: The authors present the guidelines of the French Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (SFORL) for the management of recurrent pleomorphic adenoma (RPA) of the parotid gland.
METHODS: A review of the literature was performed by a multidisciplinary task force. Guidelines were drafted, based on the articles retrieved and the work group members\' individual experience. There were then read and re-edited by an independent reading group. The proposed recommendations were graded A, B or C on decreasing levels of evidence.
RESULTS: Complete resection under neuromonitoring is recommended in case of RPA. The risks of progression and malignant transformation, which are higher the younger the patient, have to be taken into consideration. The risk of functional sequelae must be explained to the patient. MRI is recommended ahead of any surgery for parotid RPA, to determine extension and detect subclinical lesions. Radiotherapy should be considered in case of multi-recurrent pleomorphic adenoma after macroscopically complete revision surgery at high risk of new recurrence (microscopic residual disease), in case of RPA after incomplete resection, and in non-operable RPA.

This article is the next installment of the series \"Do you know your guidelines\" presented by the Education Committee of the American Head and Neck Society. Guidelines for the workup and management of tumors of the major and minor salivary glands are reviewed.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to investigate temporal patterns and potential risk factors for severe hyposalivation (xerostomia) after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer (HNC), and to test the two QUANTEC (Quantitative Analysis of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic) guidelines.
METHODS: Sixty-three patients treated at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 2006 and 2015, who had a minimum of three stimulated whole mouth saliva flow measurements (WMSFM) at a median follow-up time of 11 (range: 3-24) months were included. Xerostomia was defined as WMSFM ≤25% compared to relative pre-radiotherapy. Patients were stratified into three follow-up groups: 1: <6 months; 2: 6-11 months; and 3: 12-24 months. Potential risk factors were investigated (Mann-Whitney U test), and relative risks (RRs) assessed for the two QUANTEC guidelines.
RESULTS: The incidence of xerostomia was 27%, 14% and 17% at follow-up time points 1, 2 and 3, respectively. At <6 months, the mean dose to the contralateral and the ipsilateral parotid glands (Dmeancontra, Dmeanipsi) was higher among patients with xerostomia (Dmeancontra: 25 Gy vs. 15 Gy; Dmeanipsi: 44 Gy vs. 25 Gy). Patients with xerostomia had higher pre-RT WMSFM (3.5 g vs. 2.4 g), and had been treated more frequently with additional chemotherapy (93% vs. 63%; all 4 variables: p < 0.05). At 6-11 months, Dmeancontra among patients with xerostomia was higher compared to patients without (26 Gy vs. 20 Gy). The RR as specified by the one- and two-gland QUANTEC guideline was 2.3 and 1.4 for patients with <6 months follow-up time, and 2.0 and 1.2 for patients with longer follow-up (6-11 + 6-24 months).
CONCLUSIONS: Xerostomia following IMRT peaks within six months post-radiotherapy and fades with time. Limiting the mean dose to both parotid glands (ipsilateral <25 Gy, contralateral <25 Gy) and reducing the use of chemotherapy will likely decrease the rate of xerostomia. Both QUANTEC guidelines are effective in preventing xerostomia.

BACKGROUND: Bell´s palsy is the most common cause of facial paralysis worldwide and the most common disorder of the cranial nerves. It is a diagnosis of exclusion, accounting for 60-75% of all acquired peripheral facial nerve palsies. Our case shows the first case of a microcystic adnexal carcinoma-like squamous cell carcinoma as a cause of facial nerve palsy.
METHODS: The patient, a 70-year-old Caucasian male, experienced subsequent functional impairment of the trigeminal and the glossopharyngeal nerve about 1½ years after refractory facial nerve palsy. An extensive clinical work-up and tissue biopsy of the surrounding parotid gland tissue was not able to determine the cause of the paralysis. Primary infiltration of the facial nerve with subsequent spreading to the trigeminal and glossopharyngeal nerve via neuroanastomoses was suspected. After discussing options with the patient, the main stem of the facial nerve was resected to ascertain the diagnosis of MAC-like squamous cell carcinoma, and radiochemotherapy was subsequently started.
CONCLUSIONS: This case report shows that even rare neoplastic etiologies should be considered as a cause of refractory facial nerve palsy and that it is necessary to perform an extended diagnostic work-up to ascertain the diagnosis. This includes high-resolution MRI imaging and, as perilesional parotid biopsies might be inadequate for rare cases like ours, consideration of a direct nerve biopsy to establish the right diagnosis.

Cutaneous head and neck tumors mainly comprise malignant melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, trichoblastic carcinoma, Merkel cell carcinoma, adnexal carcinoma, dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, sclerodermiform basalioma and angiosarcoma. Adapted management requires an experienced team with good knowledge of the various parameters relating to health status, histology, location and extension: risk factors for aggression, extension assessment, resection margin requirements, indications for specific procedures, such as lateral temporal bone resection, orbital exenteration, resection of the calvarium and meningeal envelopes, neck dissection and muscle resection.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a validation test of the quantitative analysis of normal tissue effects in the clinic (QUANTEC) guidelines against quality of life (QoL) questionnaire datasets collected prospectively from patients with head and neck (HN) cancers, including HN squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).
METHODS: QoL questionnaire datasets from 95 patients with NPC and 142 with HNSCC were analyzed separately. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer H&N35 QoL questionnaire was used as the endpoint evaluation. The primary endpoint (grade 3(+) xerostomia) was defined as moderate to severe xerostomia 3 and 12 months after the completion of RT, and excluded patients with grade 3(+) xerostomia at the baseline. The Lyman-Kutcher-Burman normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model was used to describe the incidence of xerostomia. Negative predictive values (NPVs) were used to determine the rate of correctly predicting the lack of complications.
RESULTS: NTCP fitted parameters were TD₅₀=37.8 Gy (CI: 29.1-46.9 Gy), m=0.59 (CI: 0.48-0.80) and TD50=43.9 Gy (CI: 33.2-52.8 Gy), m=0.48 (CI: 0.37-0.76) at the 3-month and 12-month time points, respectively. For QUANTEC validation, HN and HNSCC data validation gave similar results at 3 months; at mean doses to the spared parotid of ≤20 and ≤25 Gy, the QoL dataset showed approximately 22% and 28% rates of xerostomia, respectively. At 12 months, the rates of xerostomia were approximately 13% and 19%, respectively. For NPC cases, the dataset showed approximately 0% and 33% (∼67% NPV) rates of xerostomia at 3 months. At 12 months, both rates of xerostomia were approximately 0% (∼100% NPV), which differed significantly from the results for the HNSCC cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: The QoL datasets validated the QUANTEC guidelines and suggested that the modified QUANTEC 20/20-Gy spared-gland guideline is suitable for clinical use in HNSCC cohorts to effectively avoid xerostomia, and the QUANTEC 25-Gy guideline is justified for NPC cohorts.

OBJECTIVE: There is considerable controversy surrounding target volume definition for parotid-sparing intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric and radiobiological predictors of outcome anticipated by application of the detailed target volume definition guidelines agreed for the UK multicentre randomised controlled trial of parotid-sparing IMRT (PARSPORT).
METHODS: Five patients eligible for the study were delineated using the trial guidelines. Following the protocol, plans were produced to treat these volumes with three-dimensional radiotherapy (control arm) and IMRT aimed to spare dose to the contralateral parotid gland (experimental arm). Dosimetric comparisons were made between plans, and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) modelling for salivary glands was carried out.
RESULTS: Doses delivered to the planning target volumes (PTV) were similar with each technique, although IMRT produced more homogeneous irradiation of the PTV. Mean doses to the contralateral parotid gland were 22.4+/-1.7 Gy with the IMRT plans vs 60.0+/-7.2 Gy with three-dimensional radiotherapy, P=0.0003. Calculated contralateral parotid gland NTCP values for grade 2 xerostomia were 20-22% for IMRT and 98-100% for three-dimensional radiotherapy (P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Pre-clinical evaluation of the PARSPORT trial target volume definition guidelines provides theoretical support for a significant reduction in xerostomia rates. These data await confirmation from the clinical trial results.