• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Laser, Radiotherapy Appear Similar in Oncologic Outcomes for Glottic Cancer

by Ed Susman • October 1, 2008

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

A meta-analysis of the literature suggests that oncologic and voice quality results are similar if patients with early-stage glottic cancer are treated with either transoral laser surgery or external beam radiotherapy.

You Might Also Like

  • Transoral Laser Resection for Early Glottic Cancer
  • Laser Treatment Resolves Glottic Cancer in a Pilot Study
  • Transoral Laser Microsurgery Favored Over Radiotherapy in T1 Glottic Carcinoma Survival
  • Cost Analysis of Transoral Surgery versus XRT for Early-Stage Glottic Cancer
Explore This Issue
October 2008

The optimal treatment for early-stage glottic cancer remains controversial, said Manish D. Shah, MD, MPhil, a resident in the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre at the University of Toronto. There appears to be similar oncologic control with external beam radiotherapy, open partial laryngectomy, and transoral laser surgery. The five-year locoregional control is around 90 percent.

Manish D. Shah, MD, MPhilDoctors should consider the potential morbidity of treatment and cost and utilization of health care resources and patient preference in considering which treatment would work best in each individual.
-Manish D. Shah, MD, MPhil

In a presentation during the 111th annual meeting of the Triological Society, conducted in conjunction with the Combined Otolaryngology Spring Meeting, Dr. Shah described how his research team evaluated dozens of reports and articles in attempting to compare clinically meaningful outcomes of laser and radiotherapy regimens.

Previous research suggests that external beam radiotherapy is associated with improved post-treatment voice outcome, Dr. Shah said. Transoral laser surgery may offer shorter treatment duration, improved treatment-related morbidity, reduced costs and reduced use of health care resources, and similar voice outcomes when compared with external beam radiotherapy.

His study explored whether the oncologic outcomes between the two modalities were comparable. Our objectives were to conduct a systematic review of existing studies to compare transoral laser surgery and standard fractionated external beam radiotherapy in the treatment of early-stage [T1 and T2] glottic cancer.

Dr. Shah said that the primary outcomes of his study were the five-year local oncologic outcomes (local control, overall survival, and laryngectomy-free survival). The secondary outcome was post-treatment voice quality.

The research team pored over the medical literature, both looking at published data and attempting to uncover unpublished material that was pertinent to the research.

Two reviewers screened abstracts and titles, and relevant articles were reviewed with blinding to authors, institution and journal source. In regard to the oncologic outcomes, we identified 28 studies, all done retrospectively, including six head-to-head studies and 22 single-arm consecutive case series. The single-arm studies included 10 using external beam radiotherapy and 12 using transoral laser surgery.

Dr. Shah said that a total of 7676 patients were involved in the studies. Of these patients, 5105 underwent external beam radiotherapy, whereas 2571 had transoral laser surgery.

Meta-Analysis Results

After reviewing the studies and compiling the statistics, the researchers reported the following results:

  • Local control appears to favor transoral laser surgery, with a pooled odds ratio of 0.81 ([95% CI 0.51-1.3] p = 0.38). However, these results did not reach statistical significance, he said.
  • Laryngectomy-free survival appears to favor transoral laser surgery, with a pooled odds ratio of 0.73 ([95% CI 0.39-1.35] p = 0.31). That, too, was not statistically significant, he said.
  • Overall survival favors transoral laser surgery with a pooled odds ratio of 1.48 ([95% CL 1.19-1.85] p = 0.0004). However, the small effect is not clinically meaningful, although statistically significant, he said.

Vocal Quality

Dr. Shah and colleagues identified nine-head-to-head studies that compared vocal outcomes. Again, he noted that all the studies were retrospective. The studies employed various objective and subjective outcome measures.

Pages: 1 2 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Head and Neck, Laryngology, Practice Focus, Tech Talk Tagged With: cancer, laryngectomy, laser, outcomes, research, surgery, technology, treatmentIssue: October 2008

You Might Also Like:

  • Transoral Laser Resection for Early Glottic Cancer
  • Laser Treatment Resolves Glottic Cancer in a Pilot Study
  • Transoral Laser Microsurgery Favored Over Radiotherapy in T1 Glottic Carcinoma Survival
  • Cost Analysis of Transoral Surgery versus XRT for Early-Stage Glottic Cancer

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Have you invented or patented something that betters the field of otolaryngology?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • Otolaryngologists as Entrepreneurs: Transforming Patient Care And Practice

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Continued Discussion And Engagement Are Essential To How Otolaryngologists Are Championing DEI Initiatives In Medicine

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Physician Handwriting: A Potentially Powerful Healing Tool
    • Leaky Pipes—Time to Focus on Our Foundations
    • You Are Among Friends: The Value Of Being In A Group
    • How To: Full Endoscopic Procedures of Total Parotidectomy
    • How To: Does Intralesional Steroid Injection Effectively Mitigate Vocal Fold Scarring in a Rabbit Model?

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939