Background: Radiographic concern for lymphatic extranodal extension (ENE) impacts upfront management decisions for patients with human papilloma virus (HPV) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Therefore, we set out to evaluate the accuracy of preoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) to predict major ENE (> 2 mm). Methods: Twenty-seven consecutive patients with HPV-associated OPSCC who presented at our institutional multidisciplinary tumor board were staged radiographically with positron emission tomography (PET/CT) and CECT, and underwent primary transoral robotic resection and neck dissection. CECT imaging results were correlated with pathologic ENE (pENE). Results: CECT specificity for all pENE was 69 and 75% for radiologist 1 and 2, respectively. For pENE > 2 mm, the sensitivities were 88 and 100%, but specificities were 52.6 and 63.2%. Positive predictive values (PPV) were 43.8 and 53.3%; negative predictive values were 90.9 and 100%. On logistic regression analysis, only size ≥3 cm (OR 4.7–5.4, p < 0.02, 95% CI 1.3–44.0) demonstrated significant correlation with major ENE > 2 mm. Conclusions: Preoperative imaging for HPV-associated OPSCC had a PPV for pENE > 2 mm of 44–55%, based on any interruption in the capsule or invasion into the perinodal fat. The PPV is low and equipoise in treatment decision making for patients with HPV-associated OPSCC may require other imaging characteristics.

Keywords:
Human papilloma virus, p16, Head and neck cancer, PET/CT, Extranodal extension, Extracapsular spread
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.