PURPOSE To provide evidence-based guidance on the clinical management of cancer cachexia in adult patients with advanced cancer. METHODS A systematic review of the literature collected evidence regarding nutritional, pharmacologic, and other interventions, such as exercise, for cancer cachexia. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs published from 1966 through October 17, 2019. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS The review included 20 systematic reviews and 13 additional RCTs. Dietary counseling, with or without oral nutritional supplements, was reported to increase body weight in some trials, but evidence remains limited. Pharmacologic interventions associated with improvements in appetite and/or body weight include progesterone analogs and corticosteroids. The other evaluated interventions either had no benefit or insufficient evidence of benefit to draw conclusions on efficacy. Limitations of the evidence include high drop-out rates, consistent with advanced cancer, as well as variability across studies in outcomes of interest and methods for outcome assessment. RECOMMENDATIONS Dietary counseling may be offered with the goals of providing patients and caregivers with advice for the management of cachexia. Enteral feeding tubes and parenteral nutrition should not be used routinely. In the absence of more robust evidence, no specific pharmacological intervention can be recommended as the standard of care; therefore, clinicians may choose not to prescribe medications specifically for the treatment of cancer cachexia. Nonetheless, when it is decided to trial a drug to improve appetite and/or improve weight gain, currently available pharmacologic interventions that may be used include progesterone analogs and short-term (weeks) corticosteroids.

PURPOSE To provide evidence-based recommendations for practicing physicians and other healthcare providers on the management of salivary gland malignancy. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, neuroradiology, pathology, and patient advocacy experts to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 2000 through 2020. Outcomes of interest included survival, diagnostic accuracy, disease recurrence, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS The literature search identified 293 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. Six main clinical questions were addressed, which included subquestions on preoperative evaluations, surgical diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, appropriate radiotherapy techniques, the role of systemic therapy, and follow-up evaluations. RECOMMENDATIONS When possible, evidence-based recommendations were developed to address the diagnosis and appropriate preoperative evaluations for patients with a salivary gland malignancy, therapeutic procedures, and appropriate treatment options in various salivary gland histologies. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines .

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00033631.

BACKGROUND:Patients with head and neck cancer experience loss of weight and muscle mass, decreased functioning, malnutrition, depression, and declines in quality of life during and after treatment. The purpose of this exploratory randomized study was to determine the optimal timing for the initiation of a lifestyle and progressive resistance exercise training intervention (during or after radiation therapy), as determined by intervention adherence and by comparing between-group outcomes across 24 weeks. METHODS: Sixty patients with head and neck cancer were randomized to engage in a 12-week lifestyle intervention and progressive resistancetraining program either during radiation treatment or immediately after completion. The primary outcome of body compositionspecifically, lean body mass, body mass index, and body fat-as well as secondary outcomes of fitness, quality of life, depression, and nutrition status were evaluated. RESULTS: The progressive resistance-training intervention carried out during treatment did not significantly influence the primary outcome of body composition, despite a significant increase in weekly physical activity reported by the intervention group. A small-to-medium intervention effect was noted for some secondary outcomes, including fitness, quality of life, and nutrition status. Regardless of whether patients received the immediate or delayed progressive resistance-training intervention, the analysis revealed a main effect of time on body composition, fitness, quality of life, depression, and nutritional scores. CONCLUSIONS: Although the intervention during treatment did not reduce the loss of lean body mass, delaying the exercise program until after treatment completion was associated with improved intervention adherence, a finding with important clinical implications. Cancer 2016;122:1185

The Risk Model is a validated outcome predictor for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (Brandwein-Gensler et al. in Am J Surg Pathol 20:167-178, 2005; Am J Surg Pathol 34:676-688, 2010 Head and Neck Pathol (2013) 7:211-223 DOI 10.1007/s12105-012-0412-1 in 9 T1N0 patients (6 %) and 9 T2N0 patients (10 %). On multivariable analysis, the Risk Model was significantly predictive of LRR (p = 0.0012, HR 2.41, 95 % CI 1.42, 4.11) and DSS (p = 0.0005, HR 9.16, 95 % CI 2.65, 31.66) adjusted for potential confounders. WPOI alone was also significantly predictive for LRR adjusted for potential confounders with a cut-point of either WPOI-4 (p = 0.0029, HR 3.63, 95 % CI 1.56, 8.47) or WPOI-5 (p = 0.0008, HR 2.55, 95 % CI 1.48, 4.41) and for DSS (cut point WPOI-5, p = 0.0001, HR 6.34, 95 % CI 2.50, 16.09). Given a WPOI-5, the probability of developing locoregional recurrence is 42 %. Given a high-risk classification for a combination of features other than WPOI-5, the probability of developing locoregional recurrence is 32 %. The Risk Model is the first validated model that is significantly predictive for the important niche group of low-stage OCSCC patients.