Tom 9, Nr 3 (2024)
Artykuł przeglądowy
Opublikowany online: 2024-05-20

dostęp otwarty

Wyświetlenia strony 72
Wyświetlenia/pobrania artykułu 86
Pobierz cytowanie

Eksport do Mediów Społecznościowych

Eksport do Mediów Społecznościowych

The management of oral cancer – current standards and future perspectives. A review of the literature

Natalia Amrogowicz1, Tomasz Rutkowski2
Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Onkologicznego Nowotwory 2024;9(3):237-244.

Streszczenie

Oral cancer (OC) is one of the most common cancers of the head and neck region, with approximately 1,950 new cases reported in Poland in 2019. The main factors contributing to the development of OC are cigarette smoking and excessive alcohol consumption. Squamous cell carcinoma accounts for more than 90% of all OCs. In patients with OC, surgery is the treatment of choice, but there is a high number of patients who require complementary treatment – radiothe­rapy or radiochemotherapy. The treatment of these tumours should be comprehensive and multidisciplinary. Due to suboptimal treatment outcomes in this patient group, numerous clinical trials are being conducted to search for new, more effective treatments. The aim of this study was to review the literature on current and new methods of diagnosis and treatment of OC, and to analyse the clinical trials currently available for OC patients in Poland. Despite the use of modern drugs, only modest progress has been made in terms of treatment efficacy.

Artykuł przeglądowy / Review article
Nowotwory głowy i szyi / Head and neck cancers

Biuletyn Polskiego
Towarzystwa Onkologicznego
NOWOTWORY

2024, tom 9, nr 3, 237–244

© Polskie Towarzystwo Onkologiczne

ISSN: 2543–5248, e-ISSN: 2543–8077

www.nowotwory.edu.pl

The management of oral cancer – current standards and future perspectives. A review of the literature

Natalia Amrogowicz1Tomasz Rutkowski2
11st Radiation and Clinical Oncology Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice Branch, Gliwice, Poland
2Department of Radiotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice Branch, Gliwice, Poland
Oral cancer (OC) is one of the most common cancers of the head and neck region, with approximately 1,950 new cases reported in Poland in 2019. The main factors contributing to the development of OC are cigarette smoking and excessive alcohol consumption. Squamous cell carcinoma accounts for more than 90% of all OCs. In patients with OC, surgery is the treatment of choice, but there is a high number of patients who require complementary treatment – radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy. The treatment of these tumours should be comprehensive and multidisciplinary. Due to suboptimal treatment outcomes in this patient group, numerous clinical trials are being conducted to search for new, more effective treatments. The aim of this study was to review the literature on current and new methods of diagnosis and treatment of OC, and to analyse the clinical trials currently available for OC patients in Poland. Despite the use of modern drugs, only modest progress has been made in terms of treatment efficacy.
Key words: oral cancer treatment, clinical trials

Jak cytować / How to cite:

Amrogowicz N, Rutkowski T. The management of oral cancer – current standards and future perspectives. A review of the literature. NOWOTWORY J Oncol 2024; 74: 213–220.

Introduction

Oral cancer (OC) is one of the most common cancers in the head and neck region. In 2020, there were 377,713 new cases worldwide, with the highest incidence found in the Asian countries of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and India [1]. According to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) classification, OC is a squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) originating in the mucosa of the upper and lower lip, cheek, retromolar trigone, vestibule of oral cavity, alveolar process and upper and lower gingiva, hard palate, movable part of the tongue and the floor of the mouth. Treatment of tumours located in this area should be comprehensive and multidisciplinary. The aim of this study was to review the literature on current and new methods for diagnosing and treating oral cancer, and to analyse the clinical trials currently available for oral cancer patients in Poland.

Epidemiology

Epidemiological data show that in 2019, approximately 1,950 new cases (accounting for approximately 1.13% of all malignancies) and 1,234 deaths from OC were reported in Poland [2]. According to World Health Organization (WHO) data, Poland ranked 5th in Europe in the number of new cases (after Ukraine, Belarus, Hungary and Latvia) and 6th in Europe in the number of deaths (after Ukraine, Romania, Lithuania, Malta and Moldova) due to OC [1–2]. According to a report by the National Cancer Registry, since 2001, there has been a clear upwards trend in both incidence and mortality from OC for all possible locations with the exception of lip cancer in men, where there has been a gradual decline in incidence. Men are more frequently affected by OC. The movable part of the tongue (data for 2019) is the most common oral location of OC in the Polish population at present. The peak incidence of OC occurs after the age of 50 years [1].

Ethiology

The main factors influencing the development of OC in Poland include cigarette smoking and excessive alcohol consumption. Tobacco use in any form (chewing, smoking) can lead to the development of cancer in the oral cavity and pharynx [3–5]. Smoking is estimated to be associated with a 7-fold increased relative risk of developing OC, and alcohol consumption >50 g/day is associated with a 6-fold increased risk of developing OC [3]. Both stimulant users had a significantly increased risk of developing OC. The additive effect associated with alcohol consumption potentates the activation of procarcinogens present in tobacco. Alcohol abusers who are heavy smokers have a 38-fold greater risk of developing OC than non-users of either stimulant [6].

Another stimulant popular in Asian countries, used by about 20% of the world’s population, that increases the risk of OC is betel (areca nut) chewing. According to a study, betel chewing increases the risk of OC mortality by approximately 12.5 times [7].

The risk of developing OC increases with age, and only about 6% of all OCs develop in patients younger than 45 or even 40 years of age. This approach applies mainly to patients with cancer of the mobile part of the tongue. Among these patients, approximately ¼ had not been exposed to any of the currently known risk factors. It is thought that in these people, the development of cancer may be caused by other yet unknown factors or have a viral basis, e.g. in the course of the human papillomavirus (HPV) infection.

The human papillomavirus is a known aetiological factor in the development of oropharyngeal cancer [8]. Its role in the development of OC is controversial, but it is also thought to cause this type of cancer in younger subgroups of patients [9–10]. The most common virus types identified in OC were HPV-16 and HPV-18 [11–14]. The occurrence of HPV-associated cancers is associated with better prognosis [8].

Other viruses that may underlie cancer in the head and neck region are the herpes virus (HSV) and the EpsteinBarr virus (EBV). Lip cancers may be related to HSV infection. Its nucleic acids have been shown to be present in lip cancers, while antibody levels for HSV-1 and HSV-2 are greater in patients with lip cancer than in controls [15]. Furthermore, the presence of HSV in smokers is associated with an increased risk of cancer [16]. The Epstein–Barr virus may also be associated with the development of OC, but at this point, its role remains controversial [17–22].

Poor oral hygiene, bacterial and fungal infections causing periodontal disease are documented irritants in the oral cavity, which consequently constitute risk factors for the development of cancer in this area [23]. In the elderly, ill-fitting dentures that cause chronic irritation of the mucosa are an additional factor influencing the development of cancer, especially of the gums and tongue shafts [24].

Dietary factors also influence the development of OC. Freedman et al. showed that low fruit and vegetable intake was associated with an increased risk of head and neck cancer [25]. A Mediterranean diet has been shown to have a beneficial effect on reducing the risk of oral and oropharyngeal cancers [26].

Other aetiological factors include UV radiation (lip cancer), low socioeconomic status, ionising radiation and genetic syndromes associated with the impairment of genes responsible for DNA repair and induced cell death (e.g., Li–Fraumeni syndrome, Fanconi anaemia), riboflavin and iron deficiency (Plummer–Vinson syndrome) and lupus and syphilis-like lesions [6, 27–28].

Histology

The oral cavity is highly exposed to external factors that can cause pre-cancerous lesions on mucous membranes that, over time, may develop into malignant tumours. These conditions include whitish (leukoplakia) and red patches (erythroplasia, erythroplakia), lichen planus and rhomboid tongue inflammation. Conditions directly leading to the development of malignancy include small-, medium- and high-grade squamous metaplasia or dysplasia and carcinoma in situ [27, 29–30]. SCC accounts for more than 90% of all OCs [31–32]. Other histopathological diagnoses, such as basaloid carcinoma and papillary carcinoma, are rare [33].

The lymphatic system that drains the oral cavity is extremely extensive. The presence of cervical lymph node metastases is an important prognostic factor [34–36]. Although macroscopic cervical lymph node metastases can be predicted to some extent by clinical staging, the probability of hidden neck lymph node metastases is high, ranging from 20% to 45% [37–40]. The submental and submandibular lymph nodes are the first stations of lymphatic metastasis, followed by group II and III neck lymph nodes. Because of the crossed lymphatic drainage through the anterior group of submandibular nodes, OCs can metastasise bilaterally and even contralaterally [38]. Tumour cells originating from the OC may bypass the first or even second metastatic station, and move to more distant levels according to the so-called skip pattern of metastasis [41]. There is an internationally accepted consensus that removal of neck lymph nodes is generally recommended, especially if the risk of hidden metastases exceeds 15–20% [42–43]. Several studies have shown that the depth of primary tumour infiltration (DOI) proportionally influences the risk of cervical lymph node metastasis [37, 44].

A complete histopathological report after OC resection should, as a standard, include the histological type of tumour and its grade of differentiation, tumour dimensions, DOI, description of removed bony structures infiltration, assessment of neuroinvasion and angioinvasion, width of the surgical margins, number of lymph nodes removed, number of involved lymph nodes, presence of extranodal extension with the designation of nodal groups, and the stage of pTN according to the current TNM classification (currently TNM 8th edition according to the AJCC) [45–47]. For the reliability of complete histopathological reports, adequately labelled preparations by the operating team are essential.

In modern histopathological diagnoses, which involves combining classical risk factors with molecular biology, new scales are being sought to assess personalised risk for patients. Such scales and new prognostic factors may include the type of infiltration (pattern of infiltration – POI) [48–49], assessment of the lymphocytic response (LHR) [50], assessment of the aggressive risk scale, tumour budding [51] and HPV status determination, especially in tumours also involving the oropharynx [52]. For immunotherapy, it is also necessary to determine the status of PD1 and PD-L1 in histopathological material [53–54] or its equivalent. The combined positive score (CPS), which is defined as the sum of PD-L1-stained tumour cells and surrounding lymphocytes and macrophages divided by the total number of viable tumour cells multiplied by 100 [55], seems to be a standard procedure.

In recent years, there have also been a number of studies tested which investigate the role of various genetic and molecular factors in postoperative material and surgical margins – including PTEN [56], TIMP3, SFRP1, SFRP2, CDH1, RASSF1, RORA, DAPK1 [57], TIL – tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes [58] and many others [59–61]. However, a clear statement of their clinical utility requires further research.

Diagnostic and treatment

Diagnostic imaging – a computed tomography (CT) scan of the head and neck with contrast to assess bone infiltration seems to be crucial prior to treatment decision-making. For the assessment of soft tissue infiltration and donor vessels for reconstructive surgery, contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is indicated as the sole diagnostic tool or supplementation of CT scans. A chest X-ray or chest CT scan and abdominal ultrasound are also indicated to exclude the possibility of distant spread of disease. In patients with a higher risk of distant metastases, positron emission tomography (PET) examination could also be considered. Careful laryngological examination of the oral cavity should not be omitted.

Surgery is the treatment of choice for patients with OC. Surgery involves resection of the primary tumour within the margins of healthy tissue with histopathological examination of the margins (intraoperative) and cervical lymphadenectomy to an extent appropriate for the disease stage (with an intraoperative histopathological evaluation of the adjacent lymph node groups). Depending on the extent of resection, concomitant reconstructive surgery of the tissue defect should be considered – locoregional or free flap reconstruction [33].

Prehabilitation to prepare patients for aggressive treatment, often followed by a significant functional, energetic and metabolic burden, should always be considered. Prehabilitation includes assessment of nutritional status and prevention of malnutrition; psychological support and education about the disease; treatment methods; preoperative pharmaceutical care; and information about the patient’s social benefits after treatment. After surgery, early rehabilitation of speech, swallowing and consumption of fluids and meals of different consistencies is crucial for further outcomes.

The indications for postoperative radiotherapy (pRT) include stage of the primary tumour (T3 or T4), regional lymph node involvement, nerve infiltration, blood vessel congestion and lymphatic vessel infiltration. Positive postoperative margins and extracapsular extension (ECE) for lymph nodes are indications for postoperative concurrent radiochemotherapy fractionated conventionally with platinum compounds [62–65].

Despite the above, clinical practice shows that, according to histopathological findings, almost all patients with OC after surgery require at least complementary RT. In selected cases with a “save” postsurgical histopathological report, abandoning of complementary treatment could be considered. The patients age, general performance status and additional medical conditions have to be assumed. On the one hand, age may be an indication to abandon RT, taking into account the side effects and the risk of a second cancer; on the other hand, our clinical experience shows that OC in younger patients can be extremely aggressive.

According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines 2.2023, pRT should be started no later than 6 weeks after surgery. Conventional fractionated radiotherapy (RT) (2 Gy/fx), 5 days a week (Monday to Friday) over 6–6.5 weeks to a total dose of 60–66 Gy for areas at high risk of recurrence and to a dose of 44–50 Gy for elective areas is preferred. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) is currently the technique of choice [66].

In advanced cases, despite pRT, the risk of locoregional recurrence and distant metastases is relatively high (5-year PFS 36%, 5-year OS 40% and 5-year LRC 69% [65]; incidence rate of DM, median 6.0% [67]). The risk increases with adverse prognostic factors according to the postoperative histopathological examination. Risk factors include positive surgical margins [65, 68–71], lymph node metastases with ECE [62–63, 68–74], perineural infiltration [62, 75], and cancer cell emboli in blood vessels [75]. To reduce the risk of failure in this group of patients, postoperative chemoradiotherapy (CHRT) should always be considered.

Cooper et al. (2004) showed that the addition of chemotherapy (CHT) to pRT significantly prolonged DFS (HR for disease or death 0.78; p = 0.04) but had no effect on OS (HR for death 0.84, p = 0.19) [65]. Similarly, Bernier et al. (2005) showed that the addition of CHT to high-risk groups at the 5-year follow-up significantly prolonged PFS (47 vs. 36%) and OS (53 vs. 40%) without significantly increasing late adverse effects [64].

Definitive RT or brachytherapy (BT) (when anatomically feasible and at a low stage – T1, possibly T2, without lymph node spread) could be considered as a less effective primary treatment alternative to surgery when surgery is not feasible or the patient does not consent. For definitive RT, the NCCN guidelines 2.2023 outline three possible fractionation modalities – standard RT fractionation to a total dose of 66–70 Gy (2 Gy/fraction), 5 days a week to the primary tumour area and metastatic lymph nodes; RT with concomitant boost – 72 Gy in 6 weeks – 1.8 Gy per fraction to large fields and a 1.5 Gy boost as a second daily fraction during the last 12 days of treatment or RT 66–70 Gy for 6 days a week or hyperfractionated RT – 81.6 Gy over 7 weeks (1.2 Gy/fraction, twice daily). For radical BT, the NCCN suggests LDR brachytherapy (0.40.5 Gy/h) as a boost to external-field RT to a total dose of 50 Gy or alone to a total dose of 6070 Gy or HDR BT – a 21 Gy boost in 3 fractions combined with external-field RT to a dose of 50 Gy or as a single treatment – 4560 Gy in 3–6 Gy fractions [66]. However, RT to high, curative doses only in selected cases is applicable due to the proximity of the maxilla and the high risk of bone necrosis.

As an alternative method for external beam boost in patients with early-stage disease, the use of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) at a single dose of 5–7.5 Gy, followed by external beam radiotherapy up to 50 Gy could be considered [76].

In the literature, 5-year OS for patients with OC after pRT ranges from 59% to 70%. Survival rates may vary depending on the anatomical location of the various subsites, stage, grade of OC, age at diagnosis, treatment and comorbidities [77].

In patients with initially unresectable tumours, induction chemotherapy (indCHT) could be an option. Despite the often observed clinical benefit, the efficacy of such treatment has not been proven in randomised clinical trials [78–80]. In general, the results of treatment in this group of patients are suboptimal, and clinical trials to search for new, more effective treatments are needed.

Examples of such trials are described below. The most promising clinical trials available for patients with operable OC include GORTEC 2018-01 (NIVOPOSTOP), the MK-3475-689 trial and the MS202359-0002 trial.

GORTEC 2018-01 (NIVOPOSTOP) is a randomised phase III clinical trial evaluating postoperative adjuvant therapy with nivolumab concomitantly with CHRT in high-risk patients following radical surgery. Nivolumab starts 3 weeks before CHRT and is continuing in the dose of 360 mg on days 1, 22 and 43 of CHRT. After completion of CHRT, nivolumab alone is administered as maintenance treatment. In the control arm, patients receive standard CHRT with 100 mg/m2 cisplatin on days 1, 22 and 43 of RT [81].

In another phase III study, pembrolizumab is given twice every 3 weeks prior to surgery, and is continuing in combination with RT or CHRT after surgery (MK-3475-689). In another randomised double-blind phase III clinical trial after surgery, patients receive xevinapant and RT when the platinum-derived compound is contraindicated. In this study, in the experimental arm, patients receive 3 cycles of xevinapant at a dose of 200 mg/day once daily from day 1 to day 14 in a 3-week cycle in combination with RT followed by 3 cycles of xevinapant (1 to day 14) in a 3-week cycle (each cycle lasts 3 weeks). In the control arm, a placebo is used in the same way [82]. In patients who have relapsed after radical treatment, salvage surgery is the treatment of choice. The 5-year OS rate after salvage surgery ranges from 10–74% and depends largely on risk factors, mainly the presence of nodal recurrence and prior treatment. Better results are observed in younger patients without nodal recurrence and those who did not received RT as primary treatment [83–84]. When surgery is not possible, stereotactic RT is attempted, limited by the radiation dose previously received. Vargo et al., in a multicentre study of SBRT for recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer, showed a 2-year patient survival rate of 16.3% [85].

There are two studies summarising the clinical outcomes of repeat salvage irradiation with curative intent for unresectable recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck – the RTOG 96-10 and RTOG 99-11 trials, which investigated reirradiation with concurrent chemotherapy [86–87]. Previous RT in eligible patients should be terminated at least 6-months earlier. The results of these studies highlight the uncertain prognosis for patients with recurrent disease treated with re-irradiation with 2-year OS rates of 15.2% in RTOG 96–10 patients and 25.9% in RTOG 99-11 patients. Unfortunately, only 20–30% of patients with primary treatment failure are candidates for salvage surgery or RT [88]. For these patients, palliative systemic treatment or best supportive care is the only option. An approximately 30% response rate and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3 to 4 months and a median overall survival (OS) of 6 to 8 months could be obtained with platinum combined with fluorouracil or a taxans [89, 90]. An EXTREME trial with cetuximab, an inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) added to a platinum-based chemotherapy with fluorouracil, significantly increased PFS from 3.3 to 5.6 months and median OS from 7.4 months to 10.1 months compared to chemotherapy alone [91]. A KEYNOTE-048 trial showed that patients with metastatic H&N cancer or recurrent H&N may benefit from pembrolizumab given alone (when slow progression without clinical symptoms is observed) or when it is combined with platinum and fluorouracil (for quick progression and/or aggravated clinical symptoms of this tumour) when the combined positive score (CPS) ≥1 has been found [92]. The results of this trial showed a statistically significant increase in 2-year overall survival (OS) to 31% for patients treated with the combination of pembrolizumab with chemotherapy versus 17% for patients treated with standard treatment (cetuximab with chemotherapy) [92]. Monotherapy with docetaxel, methotrexate or cetuximab for several years was the only therapeutic option for those who failed first-line palliative chemotherapy. Currently, for second-line treatment, nivolumab could be used according to the results of the CheckMate study 141. This study showed a statistically significant improvement in OS (1-yr 36.0% vs. 16.6% in favour of nivolumab compared with standard treatment) in patients randomised to the nivolumab group compared with the investigator-selected treatment group, as well as a significant increase in response time (median 9.7 months vs. 4.0 months) [93].

For recurrent or untreated OC and primary disseminated cancers, various clinical trials are also being conducted to improve the results. [94–100]. Current trials evaluate the efficacy of other drugs, such as lenvatinib in combination with pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab monotherapy, GSK3359609 or placebo in combination with pembrolizumab or a comparison of BNT113 in combination with pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab monotherapy [94–96].

For distant dissemination in oligometastatic disease, the treatment of choice is also primary surgery or, if ineligible, stereotactic radiotherapy. Preliminary results from the SABR-COMET trial of ablative stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with up to five metastatic sites from any primary tumour site showed improved progression-free survival (12 vs. 6 months, p < 0.01) and overall survival (41 vs. 28 months, p = 0.09) when metastatic sites were treated with irradiation [97]. Sun et al. simulated 5-year survival rates of 20% in selected patients with head and neck cancer who underwent oligometastasis surgery with stereotactic irradiation of metastases [98].

In symptomatic patients with poor performance status who are not eligible for surgery, palliative radiotherapy remains the treatment of choice. Mohanti et al. described similar weekly treatment in a large retrospective study involving 505 patients. Patients were treated with a dose of 20 Gy in five fractions. Symptom relief was obtained in 47–59% of the patients following palliative RT [99]. Compared to the Fortin et al. study, in which patients were treated with a dose of 25 Gy in 5 fractions, this regimen showed a lower objective response rate of 50% [100]. Furthermore, all patients in this cohort developed patchy mucositis at follow-up, 1 month after treatment.

Conclusions

There is an urgent need to develop new, more effective treatment methods for oral cancer patients. In this context, the role of immunotherapy as well as targeted therapies should be more extensively investigated. Several ongoing clinical trials evaluate novel therapeutic approaches, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (e.g. nivolumab, pembrolizumab), monoclonal antibodies (cetuximab), small molecule inhibitors (lenvatinib) or cancer vaccines (BNT113).

Moreover, further research is warranted to establish new prognostic and predictive factors, as well as disease and patient stratification models. These could enable personalized therapy tailored to the biological characteristics of the tumour and the patient. Genetic and molecular analyses seem especially interesting in this matter.

Special attention should also be paid to gaining a better understanding the etiopathogenesis of oral cancer. The role of HPV infection, but also other potential viral factors, requires further elucidation. Additionally, promotion of healthy lifestyles and reduction of risk factor exposure in the general population could contribute to oral cancer prevention at the public health level.

In summary, advancing the diagnostics and treatment of oral cancer calls for a coordinated effort from various fields of clinical medicine and basic science. Only multidirectional research and multidisciplinary collaboration can bring a significant improvement in the outcomes of patients affected by this disease.

Article information and declarations

Author contributions

Natalia Amrogowicz – concept, literature review, writing – original draft preparation.

Tomasz Rutkowski – concept, writing – review and editing.

Conflict of interest

None declared

Natalia Amrogowicz

Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology

Gliwice Branch

1st Radiation and Clinical Oncology Department

Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15

44-102 Gliwice, Poland

e-mail: Natalia.Amrogowicz@gliwice.nio.gov.pl

Received: 29 Jan 2024

Accepted: 19 Mar 2024

References

  1. WHO, Cancer Today, Raport 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/.
  2. Krajowy Rejestr Nowotworów. https://onkologia.org.pl/pl/raporty.
  3. Blot WJ, McLaughlin JK, Winn DM, et al. Smoking and drinking in relation to oral and pharyngeal cancer. Cancer Res. 1988; 48(11): 3282–3287, indexed in Pubmed: 3365707.
  4. International Agency on Research for Cancer. Smokeless Tobacco and Some Tobacco-specific N-Nitrosamines. Monographs Vol. 89. IARC, Lyon 2007.
  5. Warnakulasuriya S, Sutherland G, Scully C. Tobacco, oral cancer, and treatment of dependence. Oral Oncol. 2005; 41(3): 244–260, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2004.08.010, indexed in Pubmed: 15743687.
  6. Scully C. Oral cancer aethiopathogenesis; past, present and future aspects. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011; 16(3): e306–e311, doi: 21441876, indexed in Pubmed: 10.4317/medoral.16.e306.
  7. Wen CP, Tsai MK, Chung WS, et al. Cancer risks from betel quid chewing beyond oral cancer: a multiple-site carcinogen when acting with smoking. Cancer Causes Control. 2010; 21(9): 1427–1435, doi: 10.1007/s10552-010-9570-1, indexed in Pubmed: 20458529.
  8. D’Souza G, Kreimer AR, Viscidi R, et al. Case-control study of human papillomavirus and oropharyngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(19): 1944–1956, doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa065497, indexed in Pubmed: 17494927.
  9. Herrero R, Castellsagué X, Pawlita M, et al. IARC Multicenter Oral Cancer Study Group. Human papillomavirus and oral cancer: the International Agency for Research on Cancer multicenter study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003; 95(23): 1772–1783, doi: 10.1093/jnci/djg107, indexed in Pubmed: 14652239.
  10. Biesaga B, Smolarczyk R, Mucha-Małecka A, et al. Prognostic Significance of STING Immunoexpression in Relation to HPV16 Infection in Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinomas of Oral Cavity and Oropharynx. Biomedicines. 2022; 10(10), doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10102538, indexed in Pubmed: 36289800.
  11. Miller CS, Johnstone BM. Human papillomavirus as a risk factor for oral squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis, 1982-1997. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001; 91(6): 622–635, doi: 10.1067/moe.2001.115392, indexed in Pubmed: 11402272.
  12. Shillitoe EJ. The role of viruses in squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharyngeal mucosa. Oral Oncol. 2009; 45(4-5): 351–355, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.08.001, indexed in Pubmed: 18952492.
  13. Sulkowska U, Mańczuk M, Przewoźniak K, et al. Estimating of the number of cancer cases attributed to HPV infections for Poland in 2015. Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology. 2018; 68(4): 173–175, doi: 10.5603/NJO.2018.0028.
  14. Popović B, Jekić B, Novaković I, et al. Cancer genes alterations and HPV infection in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 39(9): 909–915, doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2010.05.007, indexed in Pubmed: 20579853.
  15. Eglin RP, Scully C, Lehner T, et al. Detection of RNA complementary to herpes simplex virus in human oral squamous cell carcinoma. Lancet. 1983; 2(8353): 766–768, doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(83)92299-7, indexed in Pubmed: 6194392.
  16. Shillitoe EJ. The role of viruses in squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharyngeal mucosa. Oral Oncol. 2009; 45(4-5): 351–355, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.08.001, indexed in Pubmed: 18952492.
  17. Zheng Y, Xia Pu, Zheng HC, et al. The screening of viral risk factors in tongue and pharyngolaryngeal squamous carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 2010; 30(4): 1233–1238, indexed in Pubmed: 20530433.
  18. Bagan JV, Jiménez Y, Murillo J, et al. Epstein-Barr virus in oral proliferative verrucous leukoplakia and squamous cell carcinoma: A preliminary study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2008; 13(2): E110–E113, indexed in Pubmed: 18223526.
  19. Jalouli J, Ibrahim SO, Mehrotra R, et al. Prevalence of viral (HPV, EBV, HSV) infections in oral submucous fibrosis and oral cancer from India. Acta Otolaryngol. 2010; 130(11): 1306–1311, doi: 10.3109/00016481003782041, indexed in Pubmed: 20441534.
  20. Laborde RR, Novakova V, Olsen KD, et al. Expression profiles of viral responsive genes in oral and oropharyngeal cancers. Eur J Cancer. 2010; 46(6): 1153–1158, doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.01.026, indexed in Pubmed: 20172712.
  21. Yen CY, Lu MC, Tzeng CC, et al. Detection of EBV infection and gene expression in oral cancer from patients in Taiwan by microarray analysis. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2009; 2009: 904589, doi: 10.1155/2009/904589, indexed in Pubmed: 20011069.
  22. Kis A, Fehér E, Gáll T, et al. Epstein-Barr virus prevalence in oral squamous cell cancer and in potentially malignant oral disorders in an eastern Hungarian population. Eur J Oral Sci. 2009; 117(5): 536–540, doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2009.00660.x, indexed in Pubmed: 19758249.
  23. Fitzpatrick SG, Katz J. The association between periodontal disease and cancer: a review of the literature. J Dent. 2010; 38(2): 83–95, doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.10.007, indexed in Pubmed: 19895866.
  24. Yamazaki H, Inoue T, Yoshida K, et al. Assessment of influence of smoking, drinking, leukoplakia and dental irritation on local control of early oral tongue carcinoma treated with brachytherapy: age and dental factors are potential prognostic factors. Tumori. 2009; 95(4): 461–466, doi: 10.1177/030089160909500409, indexed in Pubmed: 19856657.
  25. Freedman ND, Park Y, Subar AF, et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and head and neck cancer risk in a large United States prospective cohort study. Int J Cancer. 2008; 122(10): 2330–2336, doi: 10.1002/ijc.23319, indexed in Pubmed: 18092323.
  26. Bosetti C, Gallus S, Trichopoulou A, et al. Influence of the Mediterranean diet on the risk of cancers of the upper aerodigestive tract. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003; 12(10): 1091–1094, indexed in Pubmed: 14578148.
  27. Sakthivel P, Raveendran S, Panda S, et al. Oral potential malignant disorders - A long list not to be forgotten. Oral Oncol. 2021; 116: 105244, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105244, indexed in Pubmed: 33662761.
  28. Prime SS, Thakker NS, Pring M, et al. A review of inherited cancer syndromes and their relevance to oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol. 2001; 37(1): 1–16, doi: 10.1016/s1368-8375(00)00055-5, indexed in Pubmed: 11120478.
  29. Irani S. Pre-Cancerous Lesions in the Oral and Maxillofacial Region: A Literature Review with Special Focus on Etiopathogenesis. Iran J Pathol. 2016; 11(4): 303–322, indexed in Pubmed: 28855922.
  30. Khan MM, Frustino J, Villa A, et al. Total RNA sequencing reveals gene expression and microbial alterations shared by oral pre-malignant lesions and cancer. Hum Genomics. 2023; 17(1): 72, doi: 10.1186/s40246-023-00519-y, indexed in Pubmed: 37542347.
  31. Rivera C. Essentials of oral cancer. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015; 8(9): 11884–11894, indexed in Pubmed: 26617944.
  32. Warnakulasuriya S. Global epidemiology of oral and oropharyngeal cancer. Oral Oncol. 2009; 45(4-5): 309–316, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.06.002, indexed in Pubmed: 18804401.
  33. Wierzbicka M. Nowotwory jamy ustnej. In: Szyfter W. ed. Nowotwory w otolaryngologii wyd. II. Termedia, Poznań 2015: 177–211.
  34. Ettinger KS, Ganry L, Fernandes RP. Oral Cavity Cancer. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2019; 31(1): 13–29, doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2018.08.002, indexed in Pubmed: 30454788.
  35. Shah JP, Gil Z. Current concepts in management of oral cancer--surgery. Oral Oncol. 2009; 45(4-5): 394–401, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.05.017, indexed in Pubmed: 18674952.
  36. Lo WL, Kao SY, Chi LY, et al. Outcomes of oral squamous cell carcinoma in Taiwan after surgical therapy: factors affecting survival. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 61(7): 751–758, doi: 10.1016/s0278-2391(03)00149-6, indexed in Pubmed: 12856245.
  37. Byers RM, El-Naggar AK, Lee YY, et al. Can we detect or predict the presence of occult nodal metastases in patients with squamous carcinoma of the oral tongue? Head Neck. 1998; 20(2): 138–144, doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0347(199803)20:2<138::aid-hed7>3.0.co;2-3, indexed in Pubmed: 9484945.
  38. Shah J, Candela F, Poddar A. The patterns of cervical lymph node metastases from squamous carcinoma of the oral cavity. Cancer. 1990; 66(1): 109–113, doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19900701)66:1<109::aid-cncr2820660120>3.0.co;2-a, indexed in Pubmed: 2354399.
  39. Massey C, Dharmarajan A, Bannuru RR, et al. Management of N0 neck in early oral squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Laryngoscope. 2019; 129(8): E284–E298, doi: 10.1002/lary.27627, indexed in Pubmed: 30570760.
  40. Haseeb AA, Rahim AUr, Iqbal S, et al. The frequency of occult cervical metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma patients - A cross sectional study. J Pak Med Assoc. 2022; 72(1): 66–70, doi: 10.47391/JPMA.1512, indexed in Pubmed: 35099441.
  41. Byers RM, Weber RS, Andrews T, et al. Frequency and therapeutic implications of “skip metastases” in the neck from squamous carcinoma of the oral tongue. Head Neck. 1997; 19(1): 14–19, doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0347(199701)19:1<14::aid-hed3>3.0.co;2-y, indexed in Pubmed: 9030939.
  42. Koyfman SA, Ismaila N, Crook D, et al. Management of the Neck in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity and Oropharynx: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2019; 37(20): 1753–1774, doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.01921, indexed in Pubmed: 30811281.
  43. Paleri V, Urbano TG, Mehanna H, et al. Management of neck metastases in head and neck cancer: United Kingdom National Multidisciplinary Guidelines. J Laryngol Otol. 2016; 130(S2): S161–S169, doi: 10.1017/S002221511600058X, indexed in Pubmed: 27841133.
  44. Fridman E, Na’ara S, Agarwal J, et al. International Consortium for Outcome Research in Head and Neck Cancer. The role of adjuvant treatment in early-stage oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: An international collaborative study. Cancer. 2018; 124(14): 2948–2955, doi: 10.1002/cncr.31531, indexed in Pubmed: 29757457.
  45. Chen WC, Lai CH, Fang CC, et al. Identification of High-Risk Subgroups of Patients With Oral Cavity Cancer in Need of Postoperative Adjuvant Radiotherapy or Chemo-Radiotherapy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 95(22): e3770, doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003770, indexed in Pubmed: 27258508.
  46. Amin MB, Edge S, Greene F, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual. Eight edition. Springer 2017.
  47. Fukano H, Matsuura H, Hasegawa Y, et al. Depth of invasion as a predictive factor for cervical lymph node metastasis in tongue carcinoma. Head Neck. 1997; 19(3): 205–210, doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0347(199705)19:3<205::aid-hed7>3.0.co;2-6, indexed in Pubmed: 9142520.
  48. Bànkfalvi A, Piffkò J. Prognostic and predictive factors in oral cancer: the role of the invasive tumour front. J Oral Pathol Med. 2000; 29(7): 291–298, doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0714.2000.290701.x, indexed in Pubmed: 10947243.
  49. Yamauchi M, Ishida T, Minesaki A, et al. WPOI-4/5 Correlates With Lymph Node Recurrence and Poor Prognosis in Early-stage Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Cancer Diagn Progn. 2023; 3(4): 457–462, doi: 10.21873/cdp.10239, indexed in Pubmed: 37405220.
  50. Brandwein-Gensler M, Teixeira MS, Lewis CM, et al. Oral squamous cell carcinoma: histologic risk assessment, but not margin status, is strongly predictive of local disease-free and overall survival. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005; 29(2): 167–178, doi: 10.1097/01.pas.0000149687.90710.21, indexed in Pubmed: 15644773.
  51. Boxberg M, Bollwein C, Jöhrens K, et al. Novel prognostic histopathological grading system in oral squamous cell carcinoma based on tumour budding and cell nest size shows high interobserver and intraobserver concordance. J Clin Pathol. 2019; 72(4): 285–294, doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205454, indexed in Pubmed: 30530818.
  52. Ragin CCR, Taioli E. Survival of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in relation to human papillomavirus infection: review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer. 2007; 121(8): 1813–1820, doi: 10.1002/ijc.22851, indexed in Pubmed: 17546592.
  53. Miranda-Galvis M, Rumayor Piña A, Sales de Sá R, et al. PD-L1 expression patterns in oral cancer as an integrated approach for further prognostic classification. Oral Dis. 2021; 27(7): 1699–1710, doi: 10.1111/odi.13714, indexed in Pubmed: 33169454.
  54. Bauml J, Seiwert TY, Pfister DG, et al. Pembrolizumab for Platinum- and Cetuximab-Refractory Head and Neck Cancer: Results From a Single-Arm, Phase II Study. J Clin Oncol. 2017; 35(14): 1542–1549, doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.1524, indexed in Pubmed: 28328302.
  55. Cramer JD, Burtness B, Ferris RL. Immunotherapy for head and neck cancer: Recent advances and future directions. Oral Oncol. 2019; 99: 104460, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2019.104460, indexed in Pubmed: 31683169.
  56. Snietura M, Jaworska M, Mlynarczyk-Liszka J, et al. PTEN as a prognostic and predictive marker in postoperative radiotherapy for squamous cell cancer of the head and neck. PLoS One. 2012; 7(3): e33396, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033396, indexed in Pubmed: 22413021.
  57. Strzelczyk JK, Krakowczyk Ł, Gołąbek K, et al. Expression profiles of selected genes in tumors and matched surgical margins in oral cavity cancer: Do we have to pay attention to the molecular analysis of the surgical margins? Adv Clin Exp Med. 2018; 27(6): 833–840, doi: 10.17219/acem/79846, indexed in Pubmed: 29790687.
  58. Lei Yu, Xie Y, Tan YS, et al. Telltale tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) in oral, head & neck cancer. Oral Oncol. 2016; 61: 159–165, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2016.08.003, indexed in Pubmed: 27553942.
  59. Maiti GP, Mondal P, Mukherjee N, et al. Overexpression of EGFR in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma is associated with inactivation of SH3GL2 and CDC25A genes. PLoS One. 2013; 8(5): e63440, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063440, indexed in Pubmed: 23675485.
  60. Schena M, Guarrera S, Buffoni L, et al. DNA repair gene expression level in peripheral blood and tumour tissue from non-small cell lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell cancer patients. DNA Repair (Amst). 2012; 11(4): 374–380, doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2012.01.003, indexed in Pubmed: 22284908.
  61. Wróbel-Roztropiński A, Zielińska-Kaźmierska B, Roztropiński H, et al. Expression of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and their inhibitor (TIMP) genes on mRNA and protein levels in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology. 2021; 71(1): 1–8, doi: 10.5603/njo.2021.0003.
  62. Peters LJ, Goepfert H, Ang KK, et al. Evaluation of the dose for postoperative radiation therapy of head and neck cancer: first report of a prospective randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993; 26(1): 3–11, doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(93)90167-t, indexed in Pubmed: 8482629.
  63. Ang KK, Trotti A, Brown BW, et al. Randomized trial addressing risk features and time factors of surgery plus radiotherapy in advanced head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001; 51(3): 571–578, doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(01)01690-x, indexed in Pubmed: 11597795.
  64. Bernier J, Domenge C, Ozsahin M, et al. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Trial 22931. Postoperative irradiation with or without concomitant chemotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350(19): 1945–1952, doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032641, indexed in Pubmed: 15128894.
  65. Cooper JS, Pajak TF, Forastiere AA, et al. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9501/Intergroup. Postoperative concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy for high-risk squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350(19): 1937–1944, doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032646, indexed in Pubmed: 15128893.
  66. Pfister DG, Spencer S, Adkins D, et al. Head and Neck Cancers, Version 2.2023. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology .
  67. Sumioka S, Sawai NY, Kishino M, et al. Risk factors for distant metastasis in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 71(7): 1291–1297, doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2012.12.023, indexed in Pubmed: 23434157.
  68. Rosenthal DI, Mohamed ASR, Garden AS, et al. Final Report of a Prospective Randomized Trial to Evaluate the Dose-Response Relationship for Postoperative Radiation Therapy and Pathologic Risk Groups in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017; 98(5): 1002–1011, doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.218, indexed in Pubmed: 28721881.
  69. Langendijk JA, de Jong MA, Leemans CR, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity: the importance of the overall treatment time. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 57(3): 693–700, doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(03)00624-2, indexed in Pubmed: 14529773.
  70. Rosenthal DI, Liu Li, Lee JH, et al. Importance of the treatment package time in surgery and postoperative radiation therapy for squamous carcinoma of the head and neck. Head Neck. 2002; 24(2): 115–126, doi: 10.1002/hed.10038, indexed in Pubmed: 11891941.
  71. Mucha-Małecka A, Składowski K, Lange D. Histopathological factors influencing results of combined treatment in patients with laryngeal cancer. Pol J Pathol. 2015; 66(3): 260–268, doi: 10.5114/pjp.2015.54960, indexed in Pubmed: 26619105.
  72. Snyderman NL, Johnson JT, Schramm VL, et al. Extracapsular spread of carcinoma in cervical lymph nodes. Impact upon survival in patients with carcinoma of the supraglottic larynx. Cancer. 1985; 56(7): 1597–1599, doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19851001)56:7<1597::aid-cncr2820560722>3.0.co;2-5, indexed in Pubmed: 4027895.
  73. Bachaud JM, Cohen-Jonathan E, Alzieu C, et al. Combined postoperative radiotherapy and weekly cisplatin infusion for locally advanced head and neck carcinoma: final report of a randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996; 36(5): 999–1004, doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(96)00430-0, indexed in Pubmed: 8985019.
  74. Skóra T, Nowak-Sadzikowska J, Mucha-Małecka A, et al. Postoperative irradiation in patients with pT3-4N0 laryngeal cancer: results and prognostic factors. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015; 272(3): 673–679, doi: 10.1007/s00405-014-3333-7, indexed in Pubmed: 25432639.
  75. Bernier J, Cooper JS, Pajak TF, et al. Defining risk levels in locally advanced head and neck cancers: a comparative analysis of concurrent postoperative radiation plus chemotherapy trials of the EORTC (#22931) and RTOG (# 9501). Head Neck. 2005; 27(10): 843–850, doi: 10.1002/hed.20279, indexed in Pubmed: 16161069.
  76. Rutkowski T, Wygoda A, Hutnik M, et al. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) with low-energy photons as a boost in patients with early-stage oral cancer with the indications for postoperative radiotherapy : treatment feasibility and preliminary results. Strahlenther Onkol. 2010; 186(9): 496–501, doi: 10.1007/s00066-010-2117-2, indexed in Pubmed: 20803185.
  77. Chamoli A, Gosavi AS, Shirwadkar UP, et al. Overview of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: Risk factors, mechanisms, and diagnostics. Oral Oncol. 2021; 121: 105451, doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105451, indexed in Pubmed: 34329869.
  78. de Oliveira TB, Marta GN, de Castro Junior G, et al. Induction Chemotherapy for Advanced Oral Cavity Cancer. Curr Oncol Rep. 2021; 23(11): 129, doi: 10.1007/s11912-021-01119-6, indexed in Pubmed: 34453267.
  79. Licitra L, Grandi C, Guzzo M, et al. Primary chemotherapy in resectable oral cavity squamous cell cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(2): 327–333, doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.06.146, indexed in Pubmed: 12525526.
  80. Marta GN, Riera R, Bossi P, et al. Induction chemotherapy prior to surgery with or without postoperative radiotherapy for oral cavity cancer patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2015; 51(17): 2596–2603, doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.08.007, indexed in Pubmed: 26318725.
  81. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03576417.
  82. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04459715?term=Debio+1143-SCCHN-301&draw=2&rank=1.
  83. Tam S, Araslanova R, Low THH, et al. Estimating Survival After Salvage Surgery for Recurrent Oral Cavity Cancer. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017; 143(7): 685–690, doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2017.0001, indexed in Pubmed: 28448645.
  84. Tian Z, Wang S, Xia R, et al. Salvage Surgery for Recurrent Tongue Cancer With Contralateral Neck Metastasis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021; 79(2): 490–500, doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2020.08.035, indexed in Pubmed: 32971059.
  85. Vargo JA, Ward MC, Caudell JJ, et al. A Multi-institutional Comparison of SBRT and IMRT for Definitive Reirradiation of Recurrent or Second Primary Head and Neck Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018; 100(3): 595–605, doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.04.017, indexed in Pubmed: 28899556.
  86. Spencer SA, Harris J, Wheeler RH, et al. Final report of RTOG 9610, a multi-institutional trial of reirradiation and chemotherapy for unresectable recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Head Neck. 2008; 30(3): 281–288, doi: 10.1002/hed.20697, indexed in Pubmed: 17764087.
  87. Langer CJ, Harris J, Horwitz EM, et al. Phase II study of low-dose paclitaxel and cisplatin in combination with split-course concomitant twice-daily reirradiation in recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocol 9911. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25(30): 4800–4805, doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.9194, indexed in Pubmed: 17947728.
  88. Matoscevic K, Graf N, Pezier TF, et al. Success of salvage treatment: a critical appraisal of salvage rates for different subsites of HNSCC. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014; 151(3): 454–461, doi: 10.1177/0194599814535183, indexed in Pubmed: 24894422.
  89. Gibson MK, Li Yi, Murphy B, et al. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Randomized phase III evaluation of cisplatin plus fluorouracil versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel in advanced head and neck cancer (E1395): an intergroup trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23(15): 3562–3567, doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.057, indexed in Pubmed: 15908667.
  90. Colevas AD. Chemotherapy options for patients with metastatic or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24(17): 2644–2652, doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.3348, indexed in Pubmed: 16763278.
  91. Vermorken JB, Mesia R, Rivera F, et al. Platinum-based chemotherapy plus cetuximab in head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008; 359(11): 1116–1127, doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0802656, indexed in Pubmed: 18784101.
  92. Burtness B, Rischin D, Greil R, et al. Pembrolizumab Alone or With Chemotherapy for Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma in KEYNOTE-048: Subgroup Analysis by Programmed Death Ligand-1 Combined Positive Score. J Clin Oncol. 2022; 40(21): 2321–2332, doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02198, indexed in Pubmed: 35333599.
  93. Ferris RL, Blumenschein G, Fayette J, et al. Nivolumab for Recurrent Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(19): 1856–1867, doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1602252, indexed in Pubmed: 27718784.
  94. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04199104.
  95. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04128696.
  96. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04534205.
  97. Palma DA, Olson RA, Harrow S, et al. Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy for the Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors (SABR-COMET): results of a randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018; 2013: S3–S4.
  98. Sun XuS, Michel C, Babin E, et al. Approach to oligometastatic disease in head and neck cancer, on behalf of the GORTEC. Future Oncol. 2018; 14(9): 877–889, doi: 10.2217/fon-2017-0468, indexed in Pubmed: 29578359.
  99. Mohanti BK, Umapathy H, Bahadur S, et al. Short course palliative radiotherapy of 20 Gy in 5 fractions for advanced and incurable head and neck cancer: AIIMS study. Radiother Oncol. 2004; 71(3): 275–280, doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2004.03.009, indexed in Pubmed: 15172142.
  100. Fortin B, Khaouam N, Filion E, et al. Paliative radiation therapy for advanced head and neck carcinomas: a phase 2 study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016; 95(2): 647–653, doi: 27020111, indexed in Pubmed: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.01.039.