Jan Paul de Boer

Purpose: Cisplatin-induced hearing loss is a common side effect in patients treated with cisplatin-based chemoradiation (CRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The extent of hearing loss after concurrent CRT was compared between triweekly (3 × 100 mg/m²) and weekly (7 × 40 mg/m²) cisplatin CRT. Method: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital and included 129 patients with cisplatin-based CRT for head and neck cancer (72 treated in the triweekly and 57 in the weekly regimen). Baseline and follow-up pure tone audiometry was conducted to assess hearing loss. Clinically relevant hearing loss was defined as a decline upon treatment of ≥ 10 decibel at a pure tone average 1-2-4 kHz and/or 8-10-12.5 kHz. Results: The incidence of clinically relevant cisplatin CRT induced hearing loss was 42% in the triweekly versus 19% in the weekly group (p < 0.01). The mean threshold shift at a pure tone average (PTA) 1-2-4 kHz was 9.0 decibel in the triweekly compared to 4.3 decibel in the weekly CRT group (p < 0.01). At PTA 8-10-12.5 kHz, the incidence of clinically relevant hearing loss was 75% in the triweekly compared to 74% in the weekly CRT group (p = 0.87). The mean threshold shift at PTA 8-10-12.5 kHz was 20.2 decibel versus 15.6 decibel, respectively (p = 0.07). Conclusion: Cisplatin-dose reduction to a weekly cisplatin CRT regimen for head and neck cancer may reduce the incidence of clinically relevant hearing loss at frequencies vital for speech perception.

Supplementary Figure from Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy

Background:Hodgkin lymphoma survivors treated with infradiaphragmatic radiotherapy (IRT) and/or procarbazine have an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. We investigated the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer surveillance in Dutch Hodgkin lymphoma survivors to determine the optimal surveillance strategy for different Hodgkin lymphoma subgroups.Methods:The Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon model was adjusted to reflect colorectal cancer and other-cause mortality risk in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors. Ninety colorectal cancer surveillance strategies were evaluated varying in starting and stopping age, interval, and modality [colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test (FIT, OC-Sensor; cutoffs: 10/20/47 μg Hb/g feces), and multi-target stool DNA test (Cologuard)]. Analyses were also stratified per primary treatment (IRT and procarbazine or procarbazine without IRT). Colorectal cancer deaths averted (compared with no surveillance) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were primary outcomes. The optimal surveillance strategy was identified assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per life-years gained (LYG).Results:Overall, the optimal surveillance strategy was annual FIT (47 μg) from age 45 to 70 years, which might avert 70% of colorectal cancer deaths in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (compared with no surveillance; ICER:€18,000/LYG). The optimal surveillance strategy in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors treated with procarbazine without IRT was biennial FIT (47 μg) from age 45 to 70 years (colorectal cancer mortality averted 56%; ICER:€15,000/LYG), and when treated with IRT and procarbazine, annual FIT (47 μg) surveillance from age 40 to 70 was most cost-effective (colorectal cancer mortality averted 75%; ICER:€13,000/LYG).Conclusions:Colorectal cancer surveillance in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors is cost-effective and should commence earlier than screening occurs in population screening programs. For all subgroups, FIT surveillance was the most cost-effective strategy.Impact:Colorectal cancer surveillance should be implemented in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors.

Supplementary Data from Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy

Supplementary Table from Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy

Background:Hodgkin lymphoma survivors treated with infradiaphragmatic radiotherapy (IRT) and/or procarbazine have an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. We investigated the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer surveillance in Dutch Hodgkin lymphoma survivors to determine the optimal surveillance strategy for different Hodgkin lymphoma subgroups.Methods:The Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon model was adjusted to reflect colorectal cancer and other-cause mortality risk in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors. Ninety colorectal cancer surveillance strategies were evaluated varying in starting and stopping age, interval, and modality [colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test (FIT, OC-Sensor; cutoffs: 10/20/47 μg Hb/g feces), and multi-target stool DNA test (Cologuard)]. Analyses were also stratified per primary treatment (IRT and procarbazine or procarbazine without IRT). Colorectal cancer deaths averted (compared with no surveillance) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were primary outcomes. The optimal surveillance strategy was identified assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per life-years gained (LYG).Results:Overall, the optimal surveillance strategy was annual FIT (47 μg) from age 45 to 70 years, which might avert 70% of colorectal cancer deaths in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (compared with no surveillance; ICER:€18,000/LYG). The optimal surveillance strategy in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors treated with procarbazine without IRT was biennial FIT (47 μg) from age 45 to 70 years (colorectal cancer mortality averted 56%; ICER:€15,000/LYG), and when treated with IRT and procarbazine, annual FIT (47 μg) surveillance from age 40 to 70 was most cost-effective (colorectal cancer mortality averted 75%; ICER:€13,000/LYG).Conclusions:Colorectal cancer surveillance in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors is cost-effective and should commence earlier than screening occurs in population screening programs. For all subgroups, FIT surveillance was the most cost-effective strategy.Impact:Colorectal cancer surveillance should be implemented in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors.

Supplementary Table from Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy

Supplementary Table from Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy

Supplementary Figure from Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy

Supplementary Table from Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Treated with Procarbazine and/or Infradiaphragmatic Radiotherapy