The newer cancer treatment technologies hold the potential of providing improved health outcomes at an additional cost. So it becomes obligatory to assess the costs and benefits of a new technology, before defining its clinical value. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) as compared to 2-dimensional radiotherapy (2-DRT) and 3-dimensional radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for treating head and neck cancers (HNC) in India. The cost-effectiveness of 3-DCRT as compared to 2-DRT was also estimated.

A probabilistic Markov model was designed. Using a disaggregated societal perspective, lifetime study horizon and 3 percent discount rate, future costs and health outcomes were compared for a cohort of 1000 patients treated with any of the three radiation techniques. Data on health system cost, out of pocket expenditure, and quality of life was assessed through primary data collected from a large tertiary care public sector hospital in India. Data on xerostomia rates following each of the radiation techniques was extracted from the existing randomized controlled trials.

IMRT incurs an incremental cost of $7,072 (2,932–13,258) and $5,164 (463–10,954) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained compared to 2-DRT and 3D-CRT, respectively. Further, 3D-CRT as compared to 2-DRT requires an incremental cost of $8,946 (1,996–19,313) per QALY gained.

Both IMRT and 3D-CRT are not cost-effective at 1 times GDP per capita for treating HNC in India. The costs and benefits of using IMRT for other potential indications (e.g. prostate, lung) require to be assessed before considering its introduction in India.

To report 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) outcomes of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck and identify prognostic factors.

Data on 2,095 patients at Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, Thailand between 2007 and 2014 were analysed using the Kaplan–Meyer method to estimate 5- and 10-year OS rates. Cox proportional hazard regression models were applied to assess the independent prognostic factors of survival.

8·7% had hypopharyngeal cancer, 19·7% laryngeal, 53·3% oral cavity and 18·3% oropharyngeal. Two-thirds of the patients had locally advanced stage (III–IVB). Five- and ten-year OS rates were 30·1 and 22·8%, respectively.

Cancer site, stage and age at diagnosis were associated with mortality, highlighting the importance of prevention and early detection.

Treatment volumes for radical radiotherapy to head and neck cancers commonly extend into the lower neck, the territory of the brachial plexus (BP). There is a risk of radiation-induced brachial plexopathy, a non-reversible late toxicity experienced by a small number of patients. The BP was anatomically divided into superior and inferior divisions and analysed to establish if segmental inter-fractional BP movement should be considered when planning radiotherapy in this high-dose region.

A retrospective single-centre analysis of 15 patients with head and neck cancers treated with radical bilateral neck irradiation was conducted. The extent of BP movement relative to the planning scan was assessed using weekly cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. The BP was contoured on the planning scan and the subsequent six weekly CBCTs; this was used to calculate the Jaccard Conformity Index (JCI) for the left, right, superior and inferior divisions of the BP.

The mean (±SD) JCI for right and left superior BP was 44·4±15·5%, whereas the mean (±SD) JCI for right and left inferior BP was 38·3±15·5%. There was a statistically significant difference between superior and inferior JCI, p=0·0002, 95% CI (−9·26 to −2·88). Bilateral superior BP JCI was higher, with better conformity than the corresponding inferior divisions.

Inter-fractional BP movement occurs; the greatest movement is seen at the inferior division. This data suggest the need for re-evaluation of current BP margins and consideration of a larger inferior BP planning at risk volume (PRV) margin.

The head and neck cancers as a whole are the most common cancers among males in India. Technological advancements have led to an improvement in radiation therapy (RT) techniques with subsequent reduction in normal tissue complications. To correct patient set-up errors, an off-line correction method like no action level (NAL) protocol may be used as a preferred protocol particularly for a busy department. The objectives of the study were to measure the translational set-up errors using kV cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients undergoing intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in head and neck cancers and also to optimise clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margin using NAL protocol.

On the first 5 days of RT, patient’s position was verified by kV-CBCT and then weekly during the course of treatment. The comparison between the reference and kV-CBCT images was performed, and the shifts measured and recorded. The mean error from the initial five consecutive fractions was corrected on the sixth daily fraction. Displacements in all the directions were measured. The population systematic and random errors were determined and used to estimate PTV margins according to the van Herk formula.

A total of 322 images were analysed. Before correction, 15, 12 and 9% patients had systematic error ≥3 mm on X, Y and Z axes, but after correction this was reduced to 9, 0 and 0%. The total percentage of patients whose set-up margin was ≥5 mm before correction was 5, 6·25, 3·75%, but after correction it reduced to 1·88, 0, and 0·63%. The margins of total population were reduced to 63, 65 and 56% after correction on X, Y and Z axes, respectively.

A simple off-line NAL protocol can correct the set-up errors without daily on-line imaging in patients undergoing IMRT and hence acting as a resource sparing alternative. Five millimetre margin to CTVs was adequate and safe to overcome the problem of set-up errors in head and neck IMRT.

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is an advanced form of intensity-modulated radiation therapy that reduces treatment time without compromising plan quality. This study assessed acute toxicities in patients having carcinomas of oropharynx, larynx and hypopharynx treated with concomitant boost radiation therapy by VMAT.

In this study, 30 patients of stages II–IVA disease were treated with concomitant boost radiation therapy using VMAT and those with stages III and IV also received concurrent chemotherapy with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 weekly thrice for two cycles. The total dose was 68·4 Gy/40 fractions/5.5 weeks (1·8 Gy/fraction/day to the large field for 28 fractions +1·5 Gy/fraction/day to boost field for the last 12 days of treatment). Radiation Therapy Oncology Group acute radiation morbidity scoring criteria was used to grade acute effects.

All patients completed scheduled treatment with median duration of 44 days. No grade 4 skin and mucosal toxicities were observed; grade 3 skin and mucosal toxicities seen in six (20%) and eight (26·67%) patients, respectively; grade 3 dysphagia and laryngeal toxicity in eight (26·67%) and three (10%) patients, respectively; two patients had grade 4 laryngeal toxicity. No grade 3 or grade 4 haematological toxicities were seen.

VMAT-based concomitant boost radiation therapy allows for dose escalation with good patient tolerance by limiting acute toxicities.