IMPORTANCE Recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer is usually incurable. Implementation of precision oncology for these patients has been limited by incomplete understanding of the molecular alterations underlying advanced disease. At the same time, the molecular profiles of many rare head and neck cancer types are unknown. These significant gaps in knowledge need to be addressed to rationally devise new therapies. OBJECTIVE To illuminate the distinct biology of recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancers and review implementation of precision oncology for patients with advanced disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS After exclusions, 151 patients with advanced, treatment-resistant head and neck tumors, including squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC), and other salivary and cutaneous cancers, whose tumors were sequenced between January 2014 and July 2015 at Memorial Sloan Kettering were recruited. Next-generation sequencing of tumors as part of clinical care included high-depth (median 600×) exonic coverage of 410 cancer genes and whole-genome copy number analysis. INTERVENTIONS Next-generation sequencing of tumors and matched normal DNA. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Feasibility, the frequency of actionable molecular alterations, the effect on decision making, and identification of alterations associated with recurrent and metastatic disease. RESULTS Overall, 151 patients (95 men and 56 women; mean [range] age, 61.8 [17-100] years) were included in the study. Next-generation sequencing ultimately guided therapy in 21 of 151 patients (14%) (13 of 53 [25%] of patients with HNSCC) by refining diagnoses and matching patients to specific therapies, in some cases with dramatic responses on basket studies. Molecular alterations were potentially actionable in 28 of 135 patients (21%). The genetic profiles of recurrent and metastatic tumors were often distinct from primary tumors. Compared to primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive tumors, many recurrent and metastatic HPV-positive tumors exhibited a molecular profile more similar to HPV-negative tumors, including enriched frequencies of TP53 mutation (3 of 20 tumors [15%]), whole genome duplication (5 of 20 tumors [25%]), and 3p deletion (11 of 20 tumors [55%]). There were high rates of TERT promoter mutation in recurrent and metastatic HPV-negative HNSCC (13 of 30 tumors [43%]), cutaneous SCC (11 of 21 tumors [52%]), basal cell carcinoma (3 of 4 tumors [75%]), and ACC (5 of 36 tumors [14%]). Activating NOTCH1 mutations were enriched in metastatic ACCs (8 of 36 tumors [22%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings reveal the molecular landscape of advanced disease and rare cancer subtypes, both predominant challenges in head and neck oncology. To understand the repertoire of targetable alterations in advanced cancers, it is necessary to sequence recurrent and metastatic tumors. These data are important first steps toward implementation of precision head and neck oncology.

PURPOSE The objective response rate (ORR) for single-agent anti–programmed death receptor 1 (anti–PD-1) therapy is modest in patients with metastatic or recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We aimed to test whether radiotherapy may act synergistically with anti–PD-1 therapy to improve response through the abscopal effect. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a single-center, randomized, phase II trial of nivolumab (anti–PD-1 therapy) versus nivolumab plus stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with metastatic HNSCC. Patients had at least two metastatic lesions: one that could be safely irradiated and one measurable by RECIST version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by human papillomavirus status, to nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) or nivolumab (same dose) plus SBRT (9 Gy × 3) to 1 lesion. The primary end point was ORR in nonirradiated lesions, which was assessed by RECIST in patients with at least one available set of on-treatment images; safety was assessed in a per-protocol population. RESULTS Between March 11, 2016, and June 22, 2018, 62 patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab (n = 30) or nivolumab plus SBRT (n = 32). There was no statistically significant ORR difference between arms (34.5% [95% CI, 19.9% to 52.7%] v 29.0% [95% CI, 16.1% to 46.6%]; P = .86). There was no significant difference in overall survival ( P = .75), progression-free survival ( P = .79), or response duration ( P = .26). Grade 3-5 toxicities were similar (13.3% v 9.7%; P = .70). CONCLUSION We found no improvement in response and no evidence of an abscopal effect with the addition of SBRT to nivolumab in unselected patients with metastatic HNSCC.

The COVID-19 pandemic will consume significant health care resources. Given the concerns for rapidly increasing infection rates in the United States, impending staffing shortages, and the potential for resource reallocation, we rapidly reevaluated our rectal cancer practice policies during this public health emergency. Before the pandemic, we commonly used total neoadjuvant therapy with a strong preference for long-course chemoradiation. In the setting of the ongoing pandemic, we now mandate short-course radiation therapy (SCRT). Despite multiple randomized trials demonstrating no difference in locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence, or overall survival between SCRT and long-course chemoradiation, the adaptation of SCRT in the United States has been low given concerns for less tumor downstaging and increased toxicity. In the setting of the ongoing and likely prolonged COVID-19 pandemic, we feel that these concerns must be reevaluated, because SCRT presents a well-validated alternative that will allow us to meet the needs of a greater number of potentially curable patients at a time when resources are severely and acutely constrained.

Overall survival after recurrence of HNSCC is influenced by the HNSCC subsite and human papillomavirus or p16 status, as well surgical and systemic interventions. An oligometastatic phenotype characterizes patients with solitary metastasis after chemoradiotherapy. These findings have important implications for clinical trial designs for HNSCC in the recurrent and oligometastatic setting.

Purpose:The summary presented herein represents Part I of the three-part series dedicated to Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, discussing risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management in patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer. Please refer to Parts II and III for discussion of principles of active surveillance, surgery and follow-up (Part II), and principles of radiation and future directions (Part III).Materials and Methods:The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles.Results:The Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Statements regarding risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management are detailed herein.Conclusions:This guideline aims to inform clinicians treating patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to further improve care for these men.