Role of the physician versus the patient in the detection of recurrent disease following treatment for head and neck cancer

Objectives/Hypothesis: Objective evidence supporting current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines regarding surveillance of patients treated for head and neck cancer is presently lacking. The study examines the relative role of current surveillance methods on disease detection in this patient population. Study Design: Prospective nonrandomized study. Methods: Clinical information was prospectively collected in a standardized format during 3645 encounters with patients with head and neck cancer over an 18-month period. Data pertaining to visit history, symptom history, patient findings, physician findings, and disease status for each encounter were reviewed. Results: Of 3645 visits, disease recurrence or new primary tumor was documented in 180 encounters (5%). Salvage therapy was thought to be feasible in at least 65% of cases. Of these 180 recurrences or new primaries, there were 142 patients (79%) who had identified new symptoms or physical findings, or both, before the physician's examination. Most commonly reported was the presence of a neck mass (38%), progressive pain (27%), or other visible lesion or ulcer (14%). Patients with recurrence represented nearly 40% of all patients reporting new symptoms or findings (142 of 367). Conversely, recurrence was rare in the absence of reported symptoms or findings (1.2%). Surprisingly, despite patients reporting new symptoms or findings, physician evaluation most commonly occurred at the patient's routine surveillance visit rather than an earlier time point (104 of 142 [73%]). Conclusion. Self-diagnosis of recurrent or new primary disease is extremely common by virtue of symptoms or findings noted by patients before interaction with the clinician. However, presence of symptoms or findings did not motivate the patients to seek earlier medical attention. In the absence of such symptoms, physician diagnosis of recurrence is uncommon. Given the significant social and economic impact involved in surveillance of patients with head and neck cancer, further prospective study to optimize the method and frequency of this type of clinical activity is warranted and planned.