Elicin Olgun, Giger Roland
Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland.
Cancers (Basel). 2020 Mar 20;12(3):732. doi: 10.3390/cancers12030732.
For the treatment of early and locally advanced glottic laryngeal cancer, multiple strategies are available. These are pursued and supported by different levels of evidence, but also by national and institutional traditions. The purpose of this review article is to compare and discuss the current evidence supporting different loco-regional treatment approaches in early and locally advanced glottic laryngeal cancer. The focus is kept on randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and comparative retrospective studies including the treatment period within the last twenty years (≥ 1999) with at least one reported five-year oncologic and/or functional outcome measure. Based on the equipoise in oncologic and functional outcome after transoral laser surgery and radiotherapy, informed and shared decision-making with and not just about the patient poses a paramount importance for T1-2N0M0 glottic laryngeal cancer. For T3-4aN0-3M0 glottic laryngeal cancer, there is an equipoise regarding the partial/total laryngectomy and non-surgical modalities for T3 glottic laryngeal cancer. Patients with extensive and/or poorly functioning T4a laryngeal cancer should not be offered organ-preserving chemoradiotherapy with salvage surgery as a back-up plan, but total laryngectomy and adjuvant (chemo) radiation. The lack of high-level evidence comparing contemporary open or transoral robotic organ-preserving surgical and non-surgical modalities does not allow any concrete conclusions in terms of oncological and functional outcome. Unnecessary tri-modality treatments should be avoided. Instead of offering one-size-fits-all approaches and over-standardized rigid institutional strategies, patient-centered informed and shared decision-making should be favored.
对于早期和局部晚期声门型喉癌的治疗,有多种策略可供选择。这些策略有不同程度的证据支持,同时也受到国家和机构传统的影响。这篇综述文章的目的是比较和讨论支持早期和局部晚期声门型喉癌不同局部区域治疗方法的现有证据。重点关注随机对照试验、荟萃分析以及比较性回顾性研究,包括过去二十年(≥1999年)内的治疗期,且至少有一项报告的五年肿瘤学和/或功能结局指标。基于经口激光手术和放疗后在肿瘤学和功能结局方面的平衡,对于T1-2N0M0声门型喉癌,与患者进行充分的知情共享决策而非仅仅告知患者具有至关重要的意义。对于T3-4aN0-3M0声门型喉癌,在T3声门型喉癌的部分/全喉切除术和非手术治疗方式之间存在平衡。对于广泛和/或功能不良的T4a喉癌患者,不应提供以挽救性手术为后备方案的保留器官放化疗,而应选择全喉切除术及辅助(化疗)放疗。由于缺乏比较当代开放或经口机器人保留器官手术与非手术治疗方式的高级别证据,无法就肿瘤学和功能结局得出任何具体结论。应避免不必要的三联治疗。不应采用一刀切的方法和过度标准化的严格机构策略,而应倾向于以患者为中心的知情共享决策。