Advertisement

Quantitative Evaluation of Head and Neck Cancer Treatment–Related Dysphagia in the Development of a Personalized Treatment Deintensification Paradigm

      Purpose

      To test the hypothesis that quantifying swallow function with multiple patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments is an important strategy to yield insights in the development of personalized deintensified therapies seeking to reduce the risk of head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment–related dysphagia (HNCTD).

      Methods and Materials

      Irradiated HNC subjects seen in follow-up care (April 2015 to December 2015) who prospectively completed the Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) and the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) concurrently on the web interface to our Oncospace database were evaluated. A correlation matrix quantified the relationship between the SSQ and MDADI. Machine-learning unsupervised cluster analysis using the elbow criterion and CLUSPLOT analysis to establish its validity was performed.

      Results

      We identified 89 subjects. The MDADI and SSQ scores were moderately but significantly correlated (correlation coefficient −0.69). K-means cluster analysis demonstrated that 3 unique statistical cohorts (elbow criterion) could be identified with CLUSPLOT analysis, confirming that 100% of variances were accounted for. Correlation coefficients between the individual items in the SSQ and the MDADI demonstrated weak to moderate negative correlation, except for SSQ17 (quality of life question).

      Conclusions

      Pilot analysis demonstrates that the MDADI and SSQ are complementary. Three unique clusters of patients can be defined, suggesting that a unique dysphagia signature for HNCTD may be definable. Longitudinal studies relying on only a single PRO, such as MDADI, may be inadequate for classifying HNCTD.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      ASTRO Member Login
      ASTRO Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Use your society credentials to access all journal content and features.
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Cooper J.S.
        • Zhang Q.
        • Pajak T.F.
        • et al.
        Long-term follow-up of the RTOG 9501/intergroup phase III trial: Postoperative concurrent radiation therapy and chemotherapy in high-risk squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 84: 1198-1205
        • Forastiere A.A.
        • Zhang Q.
        • Weber R.S.
        • et al.
        Long-term results of RTOG 91-11: A comparison of three nonsurgical treatment strategies to preserve the larynx in patients with locally advanced larynx cancer.
        J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31: 845-852
        • O'Sullivan B.
        • Huang S.
        • Xu W.
        • et al.
        The changing profile of outcome in long-term follow-up of a randomized trial for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 87: S57
        • Gourin C.G.
        • Starmer H.M.
        • Herbert R.J.
        • Frick K.D.
        • Forastiere A.A.
        • Quon H.
        • et al.
        Quality of care and short- and long-term outcomes of laryngeal cancer care in the elderly.
        Laryngoscope. 2015 May 22;
        • Chen A.Y.
        • Frankowski R.
        • Bishop-Leone J.
        • et al.
        The development and validation of a dysphagia-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for patients with head and neck cancer: The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001; 127: 870-876
        • Dwivedi R.C.
        • Rose S.S.
        • Roe J.W.
        • et al.
        Validation of the Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) in a cohort of head and neck cancer patients.
        Oral Oncol. 2010; 46: e10-e14
        • Szczesniak M.M.
        • Maclean J.
        • Zhang T.
        • Liu R.
        • Cook I.J.
        The normative range for and age and gender effects on the sydney swallow questionnaire (SSQ).
        Dysphagia. 2014; 29: 535-538
        • Gwaltney C.J.
        • Shields A.L.
        • Shiffman S.
        Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: A meta-analytic review.
        Value Health. 2008; 11: 322-333
        • Wallace K.L.
        • Middleton S.
        • Cook I.J.
        Development and validation of a self-report symptom inventory to assess the severity of oral-pharyngeal dysphagia.
        Gastroenterology. 2000; 118: 678-687
        • Ketchen D.J.
        • Shook C.L.
        The application of cluster analysis in strategic management research: An analysis and critique.
        Strategic Manage J. 1996; 17: 441-458
        • Pison G.
        • Struyf A.
        • Rousseeuw P.J.
        Displaying a clustering with CLUSPLOT.
        Comput Stat Data Anal. 1999; 30: 381-392
        • Fakhry C.
        • Westra W.H.
        • Li S.
        • et al.
        Improved survival of patients with human papillomavirus–positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in a prospective clinical trial.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100: 261-269
        • Ang K.K.
        • Harris J.
        • Wheeler R.
        • et al.
        Human papillomavirus and survival of patients with oropharyngeal cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2010; 363: 24-35
        • Hutcheson K.A.
        • Barrow M.P.
        • Lisec A.
        • et al.
        What is a clinically relevant difference in MDADI scores between groups of head and neck cancer patients?.
        Laryngoscope. 2016; 126: 1108-1113
        • Bailey K.D.
        Typologies and Taxonomies.
        Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA1994
        • Robertson S.P.
        • Quon H.
        • Kiess A.P.
        • Moore J.A.
        • Yang W.
        • Cheng Z.
        • et al.
        A data-mining framework for large scale analysis of dose-outcome relationships in a database of irradiated head and neck cancer patients.
        Med Phys. 2015; 42: 4329-4337

      Comments

      Commenting Guidelines

      To submit a comment for a journal article, please use the space above and note the following:

      • We will review submitted comments as soon as possible, striving for within two business days.
      • This forum is intended for constructive dialogue. Comments that are commercial or promotional in nature, pertain to specific medical cases, are not relevant to the article for which they have been submitted, or are otherwise inappropriate will not be posted.
      • We require that commenters identify themselves with names and affiliations.
      • Comments must be in compliance with our Terms & Conditions.
      • Comments are not peer-reviewed.