Clinical Oncology
Volume 22, Issue 2 , Pages 114-118, March 2010

Current Trends in the Follow-up of Head and Neck Cancer Patients in the UK

  • A. Joshi

      Affiliations

    • Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Trust, London, UK
  • ,
  • F. Calman

      Affiliations

    • Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Birmingham, UK
  • ,
  • M. O'Connell

      Affiliations

    • Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Birmingham, UK
  • ,
  • J.-P. Jeannon

      Affiliations

    • Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Trust, London, UK
  • ,
  • P. Pracy

      Affiliations

    • Department of Clinical Oncology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Trust, London, UK
  • ,
  • R. Simo

      Affiliations

    • Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Trust, London, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationAuthor for correspondence: R. Simo, Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, 3rd Floor Thomas Guy's House, Guy's Hospital, St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RT, UK. Tel: +44-207-188-7188; Fax: +44-207-188-2206.

Received 21 January 2008; received in revised form 12 October 2009; accepted 5 November 2009.

Abstract 

Aims

The follow-up of patients with head and neck cancer is an essential aspect of their management. Follow-up provides support and reassurance for patients and will allow early detection of recurrence and second primary tumours. However, there is little evidence of a survival benefit from follow-up. With prolonged follow-up periods, multidisciplinary teams may be under increasing pressure to see more patients and this could have a negative effect on the time and quality of consultations given to individual patients. The aim of the present study was to analyse the current trends in the follow-up of head and neck cancer patients after treatment with curative intent in the UK.

Materials and methods

A postal questionnaire was sent to all members of the British Association of Head and Neck Oncologists.

Results

Three hundred and twenty-seven questionnaires were sent and 214 were returned, making a response rate of 65.4%. One hundred and ninety-eight (61%) of these were deemed appropriate for evaluation and of these 111 (56%) clinicians followed up patients for a minimum of 5 years with 25 (13%) following patients for 10 years and 44 (22%) for life. Within the set of clinicians following patients for 5 years, 24 (12%) followed up patients with salivary gland and thyroid malignancies for a longer period of time. All clinicians concurred that the reasons for follow-up are to support patients, to detect local recurrences or metastases, second primary tumours and to monitor and manage the complications of treatment.

Conclusions

Most of the clinicians followed up their patients up to a minimum of 5 years, with a significant minority who followed up the patients treated for cancers of the head and neck for longer periods. More studies are needed to elucidate the rationale and evidence for follow-up and to determine the adequate period of surveillance.

Key words: Follow-up, head and neck cancer, imaging, recurrence, surveillance

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0936-6555(09)00374-4

doi:10.1016/j.clon.2009.11.004

Clinical Oncology
Volume 22, Issue 2 , Pages 114-118, March 2010