Radiotherapy Versus Transoral Robotic Surgery for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Final Results of the ORATOR Randomized Trial.

IF 42.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Anthony C Nichols,Julie Theurer,Eitan Prisman,Nancy Read,Eric Berthelet,Eric Tran,Kevin Fung,John R de Almeida,Andrew Bayley,David P Goldstein,Michael Hier,Khalil Sultanem,Keith Richardson,Alex Mlynarek,Suren Krishnan,Hien Le,John Yoo,S Danielle MacNeil,Eric Winquist,J Alex Hammond,Varagur Venkatesan,Sara Kuruvilla,Andrew Warner,Sylvia Mitchell,Jeff Chen,Stephanie Johnson-Obaseki,Michael Odell,Martin Corsten,Christina Parker,Bret Wehrli,Keith Kwan,David A Palma
{"title":"Radiotherapy Versus Transoral Robotic Surgery for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Final Results of the ORATOR Randomized Trial.","authors":"Anthony C Nichols,Julie Theurer,Eitan Prisman,Nancy Read,Eric Berthelet,Eric Tran,Kevin Fung,John R de Almeida,Andrew Bayley,David P Goldstein,Michael Hier,Khalil Sultanem,Keith Richardson,Alex Mlynarek,Suren Krishnan,Hien Le,John Yoo,S Danielle MacNeil,Eric Winquist,J Alex Hammond,Varagur Venkatesan,Sara Kuruvilla,Andrew Warner,Sylvia Mitchell,Jeff Chen,Stephanie Johnson-Obaseki,Michael Odell,Martin Corsten,Christina Parker,Bret Wehrli,Keith Kwan,David A Palma","doi":"10.1200/jco.24.00119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Radiotherapy (RT) and transoral robotic surgery (TORS) are both curative-intent treatment options for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Herein, we report the final outcomes of the ORATOR trial comparing these modalities, 5 years after enrollment completion. We randomly assigned 68 patients with T1-2N0-2 OPSCC to RT (with chemotherapy if node-positive) versus TORS plus neck dissection (± adjuvant RT/chemoradiation). The primary end point was swallowing quality of life (QOL) assessed with the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI). Secondary end points included overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS), adverse events (AEs), and other QOL metrics. The primary end point has been previously reported (Nichols 2019). In this report, the median follow-up was 5.1 years (IQR, 5.0-5.3 years). MDADI total scores converged by 5 years and were not significantly different across the follow-up period (P = .11). EORTC QLQ-C30 and H&N35 scores demonstrated differing profiles, including worse dry mouth in the RT arm (P = .032) and worse pain in the TORS arm (P = .002). Grade 2-5 AE rates did not differ between arms (91% [n = 31] v 97% [n = 33] respectively, P = .61), with more neutropenia and hearing loss in the RT arm, and more dysphagia and other pain in the TORS arm based on grades 2-5 (all P < .05). There were no differences in OS or PFS. In conclusion, toxicity and QOL profiles differ in some domains between RT and TORS, but oncologic outcomes were excellent in both arms. Choice of treatment should remain a shared decision between the patient and their providers.","PeriodicalId":15384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":42.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.24.00119","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Radiotherapy (RT) and transoral robotic surgery (TORS) are both curative-intent treatment options for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Herein, we report the final outcomes of the ORATOR trial comparing these modalities, 5 years after enrollment completion. We randomly assigned 68 patients with T1-2N0-2 OPSCC to RT (with chemotherapy if node-positive) versus TORS plus neck dissection (± adjuvant RT/chemoradiation). The primary end point was swallowing quality of life (QOL) assessed with the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI). Secondary end points included overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS), adverse events (AEs), and other QOL metrics. The primary end point has been previously reported (Nichols 2019). In this report, the median follow-up was 5.1 years (IQR, 5.0-5.3 years). MDADI total scores converged by 5 years and were not significantly different across the follow-up period (P = .11). EORTC QLQ-C30 and H&N35 scores demonstrated differing profiles, including worse dry mouth in the RT arm (P = .032) and worse pain in the TORS arm (P = .002). Grade 2-5 AE rates did not differ between arms (91% [n = 31] v 97% [n = 33] respectively, P = .61), with more neutropenia and hearing loss in the RT arm, and more dysphagia and other pain in the TORS arm based on grades 2-5 (all P < .05). There were no differences in OS or PFS. In conclusion, toxicity and QOL profiles differ in some domains between RT and TORS, but oncologic outcomes were excellent in both arms. Choice of treatment should remain a shared decision between the patient and their providers.
放疗与经口机器人手术治疗口咽鳞癌:ORATOR随机试验的最终结果。
放疗(RT)和经口机器人手术(TORS)都是口咽鳞状细胞癌(OPSCC)的根治性治疗方案。在此,我们报告了 ORATOR 试验在完成注册 5 年后比较这两种方法的最终结果。我们将 68 名 T1-2N0-2 OPSCC 患者随机分配到 RT(如果结节阳性则进行化疗)与 TORS 加颈部切除术(± 辅助 RT/化疗)。主要终点是吞咽生活质量(QOL),采用 MD 安德森吞咽困难量表(MDADI)进行评估。次要终点包括总生存期和无进展生存期(OS、PFS)、不良事件(AE)和其他 QOL 指标。主要终点此前已有报道(Nichols,2019 年)。在本报告中,中位随访时间为 5.1 年(IQR,5.0-5.3 年)。MDADI 总分在 5 年前趋于一致,在整个随访期间没有显著差异(P = .11)。EORTC QLQ-C30 和 H&N35 评分显示出不同的情况,其中 RT 组口干更严重(P = .032),TORS 组疼痛更严重(P = .002)。不同治疗组的 2-5 级 AE 发生率没有差异(分别为 91% [n = 31] v 97% [n = 33],P = .61),根据 2-5 级评分,RT 治疗组的中性粒细胞减少和听力损失更严重,TORS 治疗组的吞咽困难和其他疼痛更严重(所有 P < .05)。OS 和 PFS 没有差异。总之,RT 和 TORS 在某些方面的毒性和 QOL 情况有所不同,但两组的肿瘤治疗效果都很好。治疗方法的选择仍应由患者和其医疗服务提供者共同决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Journal of Clinical Oncology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
41.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
8215
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Oncology serves its readers as the single most credible, authoritative resource for disseminating significant clinical oncology research. In print and in electronic format, JCO strives to publish the highest quality articles dedicated to clinical research. Original Reports remain the focus of JCO, but this scientific communication is enhanced by appropriately selected Editorials, Commentaries, Reviews, and other work that relate to the care of patients with cancer.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信