Psychological Aspects of Head and Neck Cancer

Patients with head and neck cancer may be at increased risk for depression diagnosis when compared to other cancer sites, both before and after their cancer diagnosis. Behavioral risk factors for head and neck cancers, including tobacco and alcohol use, may be indicative of depression before cancer diagnosis. Further, head and neck cancers and their treatments can cause serious morbidity among patients, including physical disfigurement and loss of function. Additionally, these cancers are often accompanied by social stigma, personal shame, and guilt. While there is a significant body of research examining depression in this cancer population, there are still several gaps in the existing literature. This dissertation explores the relationship between depression and head and neck cancer. Utilizing SEER-Medicare data, this research examines the rates of depression in the elderly adult head and neck cancer population, the influence that depression has on stage and survival, and the associations between radiation treatment side-effects and depression diagnosis. The results of the studies included in this dissertation may assist in guiding interventions for depression prevention and management in this population, and in improving cancer outcomes and quality of life for head and neck cancer patients

Psychosocial interventions for patients with head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: A diagnosis of head and neck cancer, like many other cancers, can lead to significant psychosocial distress. Patients with head and neck cancer can have very specific needs, due to both the location of their disease and the impact of treatment, which can interfere with basic day-to-day activities such as eating, speaking and breathing. There is a lack of clarity on the effectiveness of the interventions developed to address the psychosocial distress experienced by patients living with head and neck cancer. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life and psychosocial well-being for patients with head and neck cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 17 December 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials of psychosocial interventions for adults with head and neck cancer. For trials to be included the psychosocial intervention had to involve a supportive relationship between a trained helper and individuals diagnosed with head and neck cancer. Outcomes had to be assessed using a validated quality of life or psychological distress measure, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias, with mediation from a third author where required. Where possible, we extracted outcome measures for combining in meta-analyses. We compared continuous outcomes using either mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), with a random-effects model. We conducted meta-analyses for the primary outcome measure of quality of life and secondary outcome measures of psychological distress, including anxiety and depression. We subjected the remaining outcome measures (self esteem, coping, adjustment to cancer, body image) to a narrative synthesis, due to the limited number of studies evaluating these specific outcomes and the wide divergence of assessment tools used. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials, totaling 542 participants, met the eligibility criteria. Studies varied widely on risk of bias, interventions used and outcome measures reported. From these studies, there was no evidence to suggest that psychosocial intervention promotes global quality of life for patients with head and neck cancer at end of intervention (MD 1.23, 95% CI -5.82 to 8.27) as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). This quality of life tool includes five functional scales, namely cognitive, physical, emotional, social and role. There was no evidence to demonstrate that psychosocial intervention provides an immediate or medium-term improvement on any of these five functional scales. From the data available, there was no significant change in levels of anxiety (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.23) or depression following intervention (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.19). At present, there is insufficient evidence to refute or support the effectiveness of psychosocial intervention for patients with head and neck cancer. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for psychosocial intervention is limited by the small number of studies, methodological shortcomings such as lack of power, difficulties with comparability between types of interventions and a wide divergence in outcome measures used. Future research should be targeted at patients who screen positive for distress and use validated outcome measures, such as the EORTC scale, as a measure of quality of life. These studies should implement interventions that are theoretically derived. Other shortcomings should be addressed in future studies, including using power calculations that may encourage multi-centred collaboration to ensure adequate sample sizes are recruited

Oral prehabilitation for patients with head and neck cancer:getting it right - the Restorative Dentistry-UK consensus on a multidisciplinary approach to oral and dental assessment and planning prior to cancer treatment

Historically, oral and dental issues for head and neck cancer patients were often not considered until after cancer treatment was complete. As a result, outcomes for oral rehabilitation were sometimes suboptimal. Inconsistencies in service delivery models and qualification, training and experience of staff delivering dental care often compounded this problem, making research and audit almost impossible. Collaborative working by consultants in restorative dentistry from all over the UK as part of a Restorative Dentistry-UK (RD UK) subgroup, renamed more recently as the RD-UK Head and Neck Cancer Clinical Excellence Network (CEN), has re-emphasised the importance of specialist restorative dentistry intervention at the outset of the head and neck cancer pathway to optimise outcomes of patient care. The CEN has driven several initiatives, reflecting Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) principles aimed at reducing unwarranted variation. This improved consistency in approach and optimised collaborative working of the team now presents a better environment for multicentre audit and research. Ultimately, this should result in a continued improvement in patient and carer experience

Protocol: systematic review of the association between socio-economic status and survival in adult head and neck cancer

Abstract Background Head and neck cancer incidence is increasing worldwide. Despite overall improvements in survival, numerous studies suggest worse survival in more disadvantaged populations; however, this literature has not been systematically reviewed. The aim of this review is to investigate whether lower compared to higher socioeconomic status (SES) influences survival in head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) and explore possible explanations for any relationship found. Method A systematic strategy will be used to identify articles, appraise their quality and extract data. Online databases including MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, ESBCO Host and Scopus will be used to locate observational studies of adults with a primary diagnosis of head and neck cancer in EU15+ countries (15 members of the EU, Australia, Canada, Norway, USA and New Zealand) where the outcomes report associations between SES and survival. This will be augmented by searching for grey literature and through reference lists. Data will be extracted using a standardised form. Study quality will be assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa scale and where possible meta-analysis of the pooled data will be conducted. Discussion This review will quantify the association between SES and survival outcomes for adult head and neck cancer patients in developed countries. The results will help identify gaps in the literature and therefore direct further novel research in the field. Ultimately, this will inform public policy and strategies to reduce the inequalities in HNSCC survival. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42016037019

Establishing a large prospective clinical cohort in people with head and neck cancer as a biomedical resource: head and neck 5000

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancer is an important cause of ill health. Survival appears to be improving but the reasons for this are unclear. They could include evolving aetiology, modifications in care, improvements in treatment or changes in lifestyle behaviour. Observational studies are required to explore survival trends and identify outcome predictors. METHODS: We are identifying people with a new diagnosis of head and neck cancer. We obtain consent that includes agreement to collect longitudinal data, store samples and record linkage. Prior to treatment we give participants three questionnaires on health and lifestyle, quality of life and sexual history. We collect blood and saliva samples, complete a clinical data capture form and request a formalin fixed tissue sample. At four and twelve months we complete further data capture forms and send participants further quality of life questionnaires. DISCUSSION: This large clinical cohort of people with head and neck cancer brings together clinical data, patient-reported outcomes and biological samples in a single co-ordinated resource for translational and prognostic research

An academic achievements visualization research since the 21st century: research on salvage surgery for head and neck cancer

BackgroundHead and neck cancer is the 6th most common malignancy worldwide, and its incidence is still on the rise. The salvage surgery has been considered as an important treatment strategy for persistent or recurrent head and neck cancer. Therefore, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of salvage surgery for head and neck cancer since the 21st century.MethodsThe literature about salvage surgery of head and neck cancer in Web of Science was searched. CiteSpace and VOSviewer were used to analyze main countries, institutions, authors, journals, subject hotspots, trends, frontiers, etc.ResultsA total of 987 papers have been published since the 21st century. These publications were written by 705 authors from 425 institutions in 54 countries. The United States published 311 papers in this field and ranked first. Head & Neck was the most widely published journal. The main keyword clustering included terms such as #0 stereotactic radiotherapy (2012); #1 randomized multicenter (2007); #2 salvage surgery (2004); #3 functional outcomes (2014); #4 transoral robotic surgery (2013); #5 neck high-resolution computed tomography (2010); #6 complications (2008); #7 image guidance (2019). The current research frontiers that have been sustained are “recurrent”, “risk factors”, and “reirradiation”.ConclusionThe current situation of the salvage surgery for head and neck cancer in clinical treatments and basic scientific research were summarized, providing new perspectives for the development of salvage surgery for head and neck cancer in the future

Measuring the sixth vital sign: A descriptive analysis of distress in individuals with head and neck cancer and their caregivers

Introduction: Distress has become so problematic in oncology that it has been recognized as the “sixth vital sign” implying that distress monitoring should occur as routinely as the monitoring of one’s temperature or blood pressure. The research reported herein investigated the impact of head and neck cancer on levels of distress, commonly reported problems, and perceptions of quality of life in individuals with head and neck cancer and their caregivers. Method: Two distinct studies were conducted; the first explored the patient experience of distress and quality of life while the second assessed the caregiver experience of these same constructs. A prospective, longitudinal research design was employed for the patient study while a cross-sectional design was utilized for the caregiver study. Measurement instruments included: (1) a demographic survey; (2) the Distress Thermometer and Problem Checklist; (3) the EORTC Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30), and (4) the EORTC Head and Neck module (EORTC-QLQ-H&N35), to evaluate quality of life in individuals with head and neck cancer; and (5) the Caregiver Quality of Life-Cancer Scale (CQOLC) to assess quality of life in caregivers. Results: Data indicate that elevated distress can exist at any point along the continuum of care in both individuals with head and neck cancer and their caregivers. Relative to the patient population, distress was most prevalent at diagnosis and length of time following diagnosis had a large effect on perceived distress. Meanwhile 45% of caregiver participants reported clinically significant distress; both caregiver sex and the treatment status (i.e., awaiting treatment, undergoing treatment, completed treatment) of the individual for whom they were providing care influenced perceptions of distress in caregivers. Relative to quality of life, participants in both studies reported elevated burden in three primary domains: role fulfillment, physical functioning, and psychological well-being. Conclusion: Data suggest that perceptions of distress are individualized and heterogeneous in nature. Thus, routine distress screening represents a critical first step in the identification of elevated distress in both those with head and neck cancer and their caregivers. Through early identification and effective management of distress, comprehensiveness of care may be enhanced and long-term outcomes may be optimized

FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Questionnaire for Brazilian Portuguese: Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Linguistic Validation

Introduction: Head and neck neoplasms often affect fundamental functions, such as swallowing, speech, eating, and socializing. Evaluating their treatment should consider the physician’s opinion and the patient’s perspective. This difficulty in assessing the success of treatment led to the development of the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module, a questionnaire of patient-reported outcomes that measure the appearance, facial function, quality of life, and experience of care to head and neck neoplasms. The objective is to translation, cultural adaptation, and linguistic validation of the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer questionnaire for Brazilian Portuguese. Methods: The translation, cultural adaptation, and linguistic validation of the full questionnaire took place in four stages, using official guidelines from the World Health Organization and the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. Results: A semantic, idiomatic, and conceptually equivalent Brazilian Portuguese version was achieved through a linguistically validated translation of the English FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer module. Conclusion: The Brazilian Portuguese version presents a version equivalent to the original English instrument, which can be used as a critical patient-reported outcome assessment

Nutritional prehabilitation in head and neck cancer: A systematic review

Abstract Purpose: Prehabilitation affords an opportunity to support the management of malnutrition that is strongly associated with head and neck cancer. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the components of nutritional prehabilitation interventions and their effects on nutritional and health outcomes in head and neck cancer patients. Methods: A comprehensive search was completed within Medline (including PubMed), CINHAL, Cochrane database, EMBASE, PRoQUEST, clinical trials registries and grey literature to identify studies involving a nutritional intervention pre-treatment in head and neck cancer patients receiving any form of curative therapy. Nutritional intervention was defined as a specified period pre-treatment and outcomes measures had to include assessment of nutritional status or body composition. Quality of included studies was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias 2. Results: From 557 identified studies, two met the inclusion criteria. Due to the low number of studies a meta-analysis was not indicated. Both studies conducted a nutritional intervention using an “enriched formula” in malnourished patients prior to surgery. Neither study reported the intervention was effective for reducing weight loss, physical function, surgical complications, or length of stay versus the comparison. Conclusion: There is limited nutritional prehabilitation research within head and neck cancer. An “enriched formula” provided in the prehabilitation period appears no more advantageous than routine standard nutritional formula in mitigating against the weight loss experienced in malnourished head and neck patient. Due to the malnutrition risks on diagnosis and the negative impact of poor nutritional status on clinical and functional outcomes robust nutritional prehabilitation research is required to inform clinical practice.</jats:p

Tobacco and alcohol cessation or reduction interventions in people with oral dysplasia and head and neck cancer:systematic review protocol

Abstract Background Head and neck cancers include malignancies of the mouth, larynx and oropharynx. Tobacco use and alcohol consumption are associated with increased risks of developing and dying from head and neck cancer. The aim of this review is to examine the effectiveness of smoking and alcohol cessation interventions on disease-related outcomes, quality of life and behavioural change in adults with head and neck cancer and oral dysplasia. Methods The Cochrane library, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases will be searched for randomised controlled trials investigating the effects of smoking or alcohol interventions on patients with either head and neck cancer or oral dysplasia. The primary outcomes are disease-free survival and, for participants with oral dysplasia, malignant transformation to cancer. Secondary outcomes are disease recurrence and progression, quality of life and behavioural change. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the ‘Cochrane Collaborations tool for assessing risk of bias’. A qualitative synthesis of the results will be reported, and a meta-analysis of the outcome data conducted, where appropriate. Discussion This systematic review will identify the extent of the current research on smoking and alcohol cessation interventions in patients with head and neck cancer and oral epithelial dysplasia. The findings have the potential to inform which interventions have been successful and how future behavioural change interventions should be conducted within these populations. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD4201603823