Surgeon practice patterns in transoral robotic surgery for HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer

Celeste Kim; Eduardo Martinez; Marta Kulich; Mark S Swanson

doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105460

Surgeon practice patterns in transoral robotic surgery for HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer

Oral Oncol. 2021 Oct:121:105460. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105460. Epub 2021 Jul 20.

Authors

Celeste Kim¹, Eduardo Martinez¹, Marta Kulich², Mark S Swanson³

Affiliations

¹ Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
² Caruso Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
³ Caruso Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States. Electronic address: Mark.Swanson@med.usc.edu.

PMID: 34298289
DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105460

Abstract

Objectives: Analyze how otolaryngologists approach HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer in terms of patient selection for transoral surgery, perceptions of treatment related risks and benefits, and adjuvant treatment decisions.

Materials and methods: A survey on HPV-related cancer management was distributed to otolaryngologists in the US through RedCap. Differences in responses were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests.

Results: A total of 111 out of 143 (77.6%) otolaryngologists completed the survey. Overall, most prefer treating T1/T2 tumors using transoral robotic surgery (TORS) and T3 tumors through primary radiation therapy (RT), though there were significant differences between cohorts. Non-fellowship-trained surgeons and those in community practices favored RT for T1/T2 more than their fellowship-trained and academic counterparts, respectively. For adjuvant treatment, non-fellowship-trained surgeons favored adjuvant CRT, whereas fellowship-trained surgeons preferred only adjuvant RT, for patients with lymphovascular or perineural invasion, >1 lymph node involvement, or close deep margins. TORS was viewed as having less adverse sequelae (i.e. dysphagia, dysphonia, xerostomia). Though the two modalities had similar oncologic outcomes, TORS was perceived as providing better quality of life (QOL).

Conclusions: There are variations in HPV-related OPSCC management based on surgeon background and preferences across the US. TORS and primary RT are believed to offer similar oncologic control, but the former provides lesser adverse sequelae and better QOL. Additionally, surgeon demographics (i.e. fellowship status, practice type, and region) can affect management decisions, including patient selection for TORS and adjuvant therapy decisions. Further study is required to better understand and standardize appropriate HPV-positive OPSCC management.

Keywords: Human Papillomavirus; Oropharyngeal Cancer; Robotic Surgical Procedures.

MeSH terms

Humans
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms* / surgery
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms* / virology
Papillomavirus Infections* / complications
Practice Patterns, Physicians'
Quality of Life
Robotic Surgical Procedures*
Surgeons