BACKGROUND: Maxillary sinus squamous cell carcinoma (MS-SCC) is an infrequent malignancy, and determining the optimal neck management for patients with cT3/4N0 MS-SCC remains a topic of ongoing debate. The purpose of this study was to compare the prognoses and quality of life outcomes of patients who underwent either elective neck dissection (END) or elective neck irradiation (ENI) for cT3/4N0 MS-SCC.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, we enrolled patients with surgically treated cT3/4N0 MS-SCC, and the impact of different neck management strategies on regional control and disease-specific survival was compared using propensity score matching. The effect of surgical intervention on quality of life was evaluated using the Mann-Whitney U test.
RESULTS: Of the 120 patients included, 36 underwent END. After propensity score matching, our analysis indicated that END did not lead to superior outcomes than ENI, as demonstrated by comparable rates of regional control (p = 0.990) and disease-specific survival (p = 0.999). However, in the 70 returned questionnaires, patients who underwent END reported higher scores in the domains of appearance, chewing, and speech than did patients who underwent ENI.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that while END and ENI contribute to similar prognoses, END yields superior functional outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: Optimal neck management remains unclear in head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (HNcSCC) with parotid metastasis. Our goal was to compare the impact of different cervical treatments on HNcSCC with parotid metastasis.
UNASSIGNED: Patients were retrospectively included. The primary outcome variables were regional control (RC) and disease-specific survival (DSS). The impacts of observation, elective neck irradiation (ENI), and elective neck dissection (END) were analyzed using the Cox model and presented as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
UNASSIGNED: In total, 268 patients were enrolled. In the Cox model for RC, compared with ENI, observation was associated with a significantly higher risk of regional recurrence (p = 0.001, HR = 2.50, 95%CI = 1.45-4.30). However, END showed a comparable influence on regional recurrence (p = 0.246, HR = 0.70, 95%CI = 0.38-1.28). In the Cox model for DSS, END demonstrated a similar HR of 0.62 (95%CI = 0.30-1.26) compared to ENI (p = 0.184). However, patients who underwent observation were associated with an additional nearly twofold risk of cancer-related mortality (HR = 2.85, 95%CI = 1.55-5.23). Subgroup analysis showed that ENI predicted comparable RC (p = 0.389) and DSS (p = 0.346) in patients with one or two metastatic parotid lymph nodes, but worse RC (p = 0.007) and DSS (p = 0.024) in patients with more than three positive lymph nodes.
UNASSIGNED: In HNcSCC with parotid metastasis, elective treatment of neck lymph nodes with END or ENI should always be performed.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to assess the oncologic outcomes of observation, elective neck dissection (END), and elective neck irradiation (ENI) in the neck management of head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (HNcSCC) with parotid metastasis (P+) and to evaluate the quality of life (QoL) of patients who received END or ENI.
METHODS: Patients with P+ HNcSCC were retrospectively enrolled. The impact of observation, END, and ENI on regional control (RC) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards model with presentation via hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). QoL was evaluated using the University of Washington Quality of Life questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were included in our analysis. In the Cox model for RC, both END and ENI had decreased HRs of 0.27 (95% CI: 0.15-0.69) and 0.34 (95% CI: 0.18-0.86), respectively, in comparison with observation. In the Cox model for OS, both END (p = 0.001, HR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.10-0.72) and ENI (p = 0.006, HR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17-0.83) were superior to observation. In patients with three or more positive parotid lymph nodes, END resulted in significantly better RC (p < 0.001) and OS (p = 0.001) compared with ENI. The two groups were found to be comparable in all 12 domains of the University of Washington Quality of Life questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS: In the neck management of P+ HNcSCC, observation is not recommended. END is the preferred option, but ENI is an alternative method without compromise to survival or QoL, except in cases with three or more metastatic parotid lymph nodes.

UNASSIGNED: Individual elective lymph node irradiation instead of elective neck irradiation is a new concept for head-and-neck cancer (HNC) patients developed for the Magnetic Resonance Image guided linear accelerator (MR-linac). To prepare this, the detectability, volume changes and intra-fraction motion of elective lymph nodes on the MR-linac was assessed.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 15 HNC patients underwent diagnostic pre-treatment MRI. Additionally, two MR-linac scans were obtained with a 10-minute time difference in the first week of radiation treatment. Elective lymph node contours inside lymph node levels (Ib-V) were segmented on the pre-treatment MRI and the MR-linac scans and compared on number and maximal transversal diameter. Intra-fraction motion of elective lymph nodes on the MR-linac was estimated using Center of Mass (COM) distances and incremental isotropic expansion of lymph node segmentations.
UNASSIGNED: Of all 679 detected lymph nodes on the pre-treatment MRI, eight lymph nodes were not detectable on the first MR-linac scan and 16 new lymph nodes were detected. Lymph node diameters between the pre-treatment MRI scan and the MR-linac scan varied from -0.19 to + 0.13 mm. COM distances varied from 1.2 to 1.7 mm and lymph node contours had to be expanded with 3 mm.
UNASSIGNED: Nearly all elective lymph nodes were detectable on the 1.5T MR-linac scan with no major changes in target volumes compared to the pre-treatment MRI. Simulated intra-fraction motion during the MR-linac scans was smaller than the 5-mm margin that will be used in the first elective lymph node radiation treatment.

UNASSIGNED: Elective neck irradiation (ENI) is performed in head and neck cancer patients treated with definitive (chemo)radiotherapy. The aim is to eradicate nodal metastases that are not detectable by pretreatment imaging techniques. It is conceivable that personalized neck irradiation can be performed guided by the results of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). It is expected that ENI can be omitted to one or both sides of the neck in 9 out of 10 patients, resulting in less radiation side effects with better quality of life.
UNASSIGNED: This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial aiming to compare safety and efficacy of treatment with SLNB guided neck irradiation versus standard bilateral ENI in 242 patients with cN0 squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx, larynx or hypopharynx for whom bilateral ENI is indicated. Patients randomized to the experimental-arm will undergo SLNB. Based on the histopathologic status of the SLNs, patients will receive no ENI (if all SLNs are negative), unilateral neck irradiation only (if a SLN is positive at one side of the neck) or bilateral neck irradiation (if SLNs are positive at both sides of the neck). Patients randomized to the control arm will not undergo SLNB but will receive standard bilateral ENI. The primary safety endpoint is the number of patients with recurrence in regional lymph nodes within 2 years after treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint is patient reported xerostomia-related quality of life at 6 months after treatment.
UNASSIGNED: If this trial demonstrates that the experimental treatment is non-inferior to the standard treatment in terms of regional recurrence and is superior in terms of xerostomia-related quality of life, this will become the new standard of care.

UNASSIGNED: To decrease the impact of radiotherapy to healthy tissues in the head and neck region, we propose to restrict the elective neck irradiation to elective lymph nodes at risk of containing micro metastases instead of the larger lymph node volumes. To assess whether this new concept is achievable in the clinic, we determined the number, volume changes and displacement of elective lymph nodes during the course of radiotherapy.
UNASSIGNED: MRI scans of 10 head and neck cancer (HNC) patients were acquired before radiotherapy and in week 2, 3, 4 and 5 during radiotherapy. The weekly delineations of elective lymph nodes inside the lymph node levels (Ib/II/III/IVa/V) were rigidly registered and analyzed regarding number and volume. The displacement of elective lymph nodes was determined by center of mass (COM) distances, vector-based analysis and the isotropic contour expansion of the lymph nodes of the pre-treatment scan or the scan of the previous week in order to geographically cover 95% of the lymph nodes in the scans of the other weeks.
UNASSIGNED: On average, 31 elective lymph nodes in levels Ib-V on each side of the neck were determined. This number remained constant throughout radiotherapy in most lymph node levels. The volume of the elective lymph nodes reduced significantly in all weeks, up to 50% in week 5, compared to the pre-treatment scan. The largest median COM displacements were seen in level V, for example 5.2 mm in week 5 compared to the pre-treatment scan. The displacement of elective lymph nodes was mainly in cranial direction. Geographical coverage was obtained when the lymph node volumes were expanded with 7 mm in case the pre-treatment scan was used and 6.5 mm in case the scan of the previous week was used.
UNASSIGNED: Elective lymph nodes of HNC patients remained visible on MRI and decreased in size during radiotherapy. The displacement of elective lymph nodes differ per lymph node level and were mainly directed cranially. Weekly adaptation does not seem to improve coverage of elective lymph nodes. Based on our findings we expect elective lymph node irradiation is achievable in the clinic.

Identifying the lymph node target volume in patients with node-negative sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma (SNSCC) crossing the midline poses a challenge. This study aims to address this.
We retrospectively reviewed clinically N0 patients with tumors crossing the midline who received elective neck irradiation (ENI) from two centers between 1999 and 2019. The main endpoint was regional relapse-free survival (RRFS).
We included 104 patients: 64 received bilateral ENI, and 40 received ipsilateral-only ENI (median follow-up time was 89.99 and 95.01 months, respectively). At 5 years, the RRFS rates were comparable (57.68% vs. 55.83%, p = 0.372), as were the contralateral RRFS (57.68% vs. 61.62%, p = 0.541). Five-year OS, LRFS, and DMFS showed no significant difference between two groups.
Our findings provide preliminary evidence suggesting the potential for avoiding contralateral ENI in SNSCC patients with midline crossing tumors who undergo ipsilateral ENI, covering at least level II. Validation through future prospective studies is necessary.

Sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNMM) is a rare malignant neoplasm. The regional failure pattern and effectiveness of elective neck irradiation (ENI) were not well defined. Here, we would assess the value of ENI for clinical node negative (cN0) SNMM patients.
A total of 107 SNMM patients treated at our institution over a period of 30 years was retrospectively analyzed.
Five patients had lymph node metastases at diagnosis. Among the 102 cN0 patients analyzed, 37 patients had received ENI, and 65 patients had not. ENI significantly reduced the regional recurrence rate from 23.1% (15/65) to 2.7% (1/37). Ipsilateral levels Ib and II were the most common locations of regional relapse. Multivariate analysis also showed that ENI was the only independent favorable predictor for the achievement of regional control (HR: 9.120; 95% CI: 1.204-69.109; P = 0.032).
This is the largest cohort of SNMM patients from a single institution analyzed for the assessment of the value of ENI on regional control and survival. ENI significantly reduced the regional relapse rate in our study. Ipsilateral levels Ib and II might be considerable when deliver elective neck irradiation, more evidence is needed in the future.

UNASSIGNED: The long-term complication rate in head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients caused by radiotherapy (RT) can be decreased by restricting elective neck irradiation (ENI) from large adjacent lymph node levels to only individual elective lymph nodes. The primary objective of this study is to treat the first HNSCC patients with individual elective lymph node irradiation by means of a Magnetic Resonance-linac (MR-linac) in order to assess the feasibility.
UNASSIGNED: In this phase I feasibility study, 20 patients will be included with histologically proven cT2-4N0-1M0 HNSCC originating from the oropharynx, hypopharynx or larynx, planned for treatment with primary radiotherapy and bilateral elective neck irradiation (ENI). Patients will be treated with 35 fractions in six weeks, according to the DAHANCA schedule. Individual lymph nodes inside the conventional lymph node levels will be categorized in low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk based on cytology, histology and imaging parameters. Low-risk and intermediate-risk lymph nodes will irradiated in 20 and 23 fractions respectively, with a fraction dose of 2 Gy (=40/46 Gy EQD2). The high-risk lymph nodes and the primary tumor will be irradiated in 35 fractions of 2 Gy (=70 Gy equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2)). To limit treatment burden, 20 fractions will be applied on the MR-linac. The last 15 fractions (sequential boost at the primary tumor, intermediate-risk and high-risk lymph nodes) will be applied on a conventional linear accelerator. The main study endpoint is the percentage of fractions that are successfully completed on the MR-linac.
UNASSIGNED: With individual elective lymph node irradiation we expect less toxicity and a better quality of life for HNSCC patients. However, as the treatment time on the MR-linac will be longer (30-45 vs 15 min per fraction) we need to examine if patients can endure this new treatment concept.

Radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer classically include large prophylactic node volume. However, the use of these large volumes can be responsible for significant toxicity. Furthermore, the disappointing results of radioimmunotherapy combinations in head and neck tumors raise concerns about radiotherapy\'s potential negative impact on the immune response when large lymph node volumes are treated. Besides, in other tumor locations, such as lung cancers, the volumes of elective irradiation have been considerably reduced, with the same local control as before. This opinion piece reviews the current state of radiation volumes in head and neck cancers, the rationale for these volumes, the potential impact of radiotherapy on immune response, and the volume changes that would improve the efficacy of radioimmunotherapy combinations.