Primary tumor site for localized Merkel cell carcinoma drives different management strategies without impacting oncologic outcomes

•For MCC patients who received RT, practice patterns varied by primary tumor site.•Patients with head & neck MCC had less surgery and more radiation therapy.•Despite practice variance by tumor site, patients had similar locoregional control.•Given similar outcomes, patient-centric approaches for...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inRadiotherapy and oncology Vol. 188; p. 109892
Main Authors Cass, Samuel, Cope, Brandon, Bishop, Andrew J., Chiang, Yi-Ju, Ashleigh Guadagnolo, B., Farooqi, Ahsan, Morrison, William, Witt, Russell G., Seervai, Riyad N.H., Garden, Adam S., Fuller, Clifton D., Goepfert, Ryan P., Ross, Merrick, Gershenwald, Jeffrey E., Wong, Michael, Aung, Phyu P., Keung, Emily Z., Mitra, Devarati
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Ireland Elsevier B.V 01.11.2023
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:•For MCC patients who received RT, practice patterns varied by primary tumor site.•Patients with head & neck MCC had less surgery and more radiation therapy.•Despite practice variance by tumor site, patients had similar locoregional control.•Given similar outcomes, patient-centric approaches for management are warranted. Clinically localized Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) has been associated with high rates of disease relapse. This study examines how primary tumor anatomic site drives patterns of care and outcomes in a large cohort treated in the contemporary era. Patterns of care and associated outcomes were evaluated for clinically Stage I-II MCC patients treated at our institution with adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) to the primary site and/or regional nodal basin as a component of their curative intent therapy between 2014–2021. Of 80 patients who met inclusion criteria, the primary tumor anatomic site was head and neck (HN) for 42 (53%) and non-head and neck (NHN) for 38 (47%). Primary tumor risk factors were similar between cohorts. Fewer patients with HN tumors had wide local excision (WLE; HN-81% vs. NHN-100% p < 0.01). Of those undergoing WLE, patients with HN tumors received higher dose adjuvant RT (>50 Gy: HN-70% vs. NHN-8%; p < 0.01). Patients with HN tumors were less likely to undergo sentinel lymph node biopsy (HN-62%vs. NHN-100%; p < 0.01) and more likely to have elective nodal RT (HN-48% vs. NHN-0%). Despite varying management strategies, there was no significant difference in local recurrence-free survival (3-yr LRFS HN-94% vs. NHN-94%; p = 0.97), nodal recurrence-free survival (3-yr NRFS HN-89% vs. NHN-85%; p = 0.71) or overall recurrence-free survival (3-yr RFS 73% HN vs. 80% NHN; p = 0.44). Among patients with primary MCC who had RT as a component of their initial treatment strategy, anatomically-driven heterogeneous treatment approaches were associated with equally excellent locoregional disease control.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0167-8140
1879-0887
1879-0887
DOI:10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109892