PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Laryngorhinootologie 2024; 103(S 01): S167-S187
DOI: 10.1055/a-2183-5802
Referat

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Artikel in mehreren Sprachen: deutsch | English
Cornelius H. L. Kürten
1   Klinik für Hals-, Nasen- und Ohrenheilkunde, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Essen
,
Robert L. Ferris
2   Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
3   UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
4   Department of Immunology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

The neoadjuvant immunotherapy approach marks a significant shift in the treatment paradigm of potentially curable HNSCC. Here, current therapies, despite being highly individualized and advanced, often fall short in achieving satisfactory long-term survival rates and are frequently associated with substantial morbidity.

The primary advantage of this approach lies in its potential to intensify and enhance treatment regimens, offering a distinct modality that complements the existing triad of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. Checkpoint inhibitors have been at the forefront of this evolution. Demonstrating moderate yet significant survival benefits in the recurrent-metastatic setting with a relatively better safety profile compared to conventional treatments, these agents hold promise when considered for earlier stages of HNSCC.

On the other hand, a significant potential benefit of introducing immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant phase is the possibility of treatment de-escalation. By reducing the tumor burden before surgery, this strategy could lead to less invasive surgical interventions. The prospect of organ-sparing protocols becomes a realistic and highly valued goal in this context. Further, the early application of immunotherapy might catalyze a more effective and durable immune response. The induction of an immune memory may potentially lead to a more effective surveillance of residual disease, decreasing the rates of local, regional, and distant recurrences, thereby enhancing overall and recurrence-free survival.

However, neoadjuvant immunotherapy is not without its challenges. One of the primary concerns is the safety and adverse events profile. While data suggest that adverse events are relatively rare and manageable, the long-term safety profile in the neoadjuvant setting, especially in the context of curative intent, remains a subject for ongoing research. Another unsolved issue lies in the accurate assessment of treatment response. The discrepancy between radiographic assessment using RECIST criteria and histological findings has been noted, indicating a gap in current imaging techniques’ ability to accurately reflect the true efficacy of immunotherapy. This gap underscores the necessity for improved imaging methodologies and the development of new radiologic and pathologic criteria tailored to evaluate the response to immunotherapy accurately.

Treatment combinations and timing represent another layer of complexity. There is a vast array of possibilities in combining immunotherapy agents with conventional chemotherapy, targeted therapy, radiation, and other experimental treatments. Determining the optimal treatment regimen for individual patients becomes an intricate task, especially when comparing small, single-arm, non-randomized trials with varying regimens and outcome measures.

Moreover, one needs to consider the importance of pre- and intraoperative decision-making in the context of neoadjuvant immunotherapy. As experience with this treatment paradigm grows, there is potential for more tailored surgical approaches based on the patient’s remaining disease post-neoadjuvant treatment. This consideration is particularly relevant in extensive surgeries, where organ-sparing protocols could be evaluated.

In practical terms, the multi-modal nature of this treatment strategy introduces complexities, especially outside clinical trial settings. Patients face challenges in navigating the treatment landscape, which involves coordination across multiple medical disciplines, highlighting the necessity for streamlined care pathways at specialized centers to facilitate effective treatment management if the neoadjuvant approach is introduced to the real-world.

These potential harms and open questions underscore the critical need for meticulously designed clinical trials and correlational studies to ensure patient safety and efficacy. Only these can ensure that this new treatment approach is introduced in a safe way and fulfils the promise it theoretically holds.



Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
02. Mai 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany