==== Front Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 0937-4477 1434-4726 Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin/Heidelberg 37133497 7972 10.1007/s00405-023-07972-4 Head and Neck Outcomes following oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma resection and bilateral neck dissection with or without contralateral postoperative radiotherapy of the pathologically node-negative neck http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5798-4675 Jansen Florian florianjansen@icloud.com 1 Betz Christian Stephan 1 Belau Matthias Hans 2 Matnjani Gesa 3 Clauditz Till Sebastian 4 Dwertmann-Rico Sebastian 4 Stölzel Katharina 1 Möckelmann Nikolaus 15 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8996-978X Böttcher Arne 1 1 grid.13648.38 0000 0001 2180 3484 Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neuro Center, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany 2 grid.13648.38 0000 0001 2180 3484 Institute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany 3 grid.13648.38 0000 0001 2180 3484 Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany 4 grid.13648.38 0000 0001 2180 3484 Institue of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany 5 grid.491928.f 0000 0004 0390 3635 Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kath. Marienkrankenhaus GmbH, Hamburg, Germany 3 5 2023 3 5 2023 2023 280 8 38433853 2 2 2023 6 4 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Purpose There are no consensus guidelines regarding the postoperative treatment of the contralateral pathologically node-negative neck in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. This study aimed to determine if omission of postoperative irradiation of the contralateral pathologically node-negative neck affects oncological outcomes. Methods We retrospectively identified 84 patients with primary surgical treatment including bilateral neck dissection and postoperative (chemo-)radiotherapy (PO(C)RT). Survival was analyzed using the log-rank test and the Kaplan–Meier method. Results Patients showed no decrease in tumor-free, cause-specific (CSS), or overall survival (OS) when PO(C)RT of the contralateral pathologically node-negative neck was omitted. Increased OS was found in patients with unilateral PO(C)RT and especially an increased OS and CSS was found in unilateral PO(C)RT and in tumors arising from lymphoepithelial tissue. Conclusions Omitting the contralateral pathologically node-negative neck appears to be safe in terms of survival and our retrospective study advocates further prospective randomized control de-escalation trials. Keywords Adjuvant treatment Oropharyngeal cancer Contralateral neck Neck irradiation HPV Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) (5411)Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. issue-copyright-statement© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023 ==== Body pmcIntroduction Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) is the sixth most common malignant tumor entity worldwide with an incidence of 890,000 new cases and 450,000 deaths in 2018 [1]. Prolonged exposure to tobacco, tobacco-related products, and alcohol is known to increase the risk of developing HNSCC [2]. Squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx (OPSCC) is one of the various tumor entities in the head and neck region with a steadily increasing incidence of more than 400,000 cases per year worldwide [3]. In addition, the identification of exposure to high-risk oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) was observed to be a risk factor for developing OPSCCs, particularly in young adult males with no smoking history [4, 5]. A review of the international study landscape showed that the proportion of HPV-associated oropharyngeal carcinomas increased from 40.5% in studies conducted before 2000 to 72.2% in studies conducted after 2005, underscoring the extraordinary importance of this tumor entity [6]. Furthermore, it was shown that a positive HPV status in OPSCC was associated with a significantly improved survival [overall as well as tumor-free survival (OS/TFS)], as this population has fewer comorbidities and responds better to curative radiation and cisplatin [7]. This improved response is presumably due to the fact that HPV-mediated tumorigenesis and viral oncoproteins alter distinctive DNA double-strand break repair mechanisms and thereby the response to DNA damage by radiotherapy (RT) improves antitumor immunity, results in an increased rate of apoptosis, and gives rise to cell cycle alteration [8, 9]. It was also shown that HPV status was a more important factor in 5-year survival than T status or nodal status, which was ultimately reflected in a revised TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors (TNM), 7th and 8th editions [10–12]. OPSCCs, especially in locally advanced stages, often require multimodal treatment which includes tumor resection followed by postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) or chemoradiation (POCRT) in advanced stages, or organ preservation using definitive chemoradiation (CRT) [13]. Regarding the surgical management of neck lymph nodes, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) as well as Association of Scientific Medical Society in Germany (AWMF) provides treatment recommendations. Here, a distinction can be made between radical, modified radical and selective neck dissection, with less radical operations sparing the sternocleidomastoid muscle, the jugular vein, the spinal accessory nerve or selective lymph node levels, and have been developed based on the common pathways for regional head and neck metastases to remove all possibly involved lymph nodes or non-lymphatic structures [14, 15]. In case of clinical N0 status and no further indications for a possible bilateral involvement due to the localization and characteristics of the primary tumor, a selective neck dissection of the neck lymph node levels II–IV and V when appropriate of the ipsilateral side should be performed. If the clinical status is N+, at least a modified radical neck dissection of the involved side of the neck and at least a selective neck dissection on the contralateral side should be performed. If there is clinical evidence of bilateral involvement, at least a modified radical neck dissection should be performed on both sides [16–18]. POCRT is recommended in patients with high-risk pathologic features, such as extranodal extension (ENE) or positive margins. PORT alone is recommended in patients with intermediate-risk pathologic features, such as positive neck nodes, advanced T status (T3 or T4), or several minor risk criteria, such as perineural infiltration [19]. At present, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), a computer-assisted irradiation technique with a dose of 60–66 Gy to the surgical bed and affected lymph nodes, is regularly used for PO(C)RT [20]. The exact dose of RT to the target clinical volume is determined based on the aforementioned pathologic risk criteria and is administered in 30–33 fractions, with a dose of 60 Gy given when intermediate-risk criteria are present and boosted to 66 Gy when high-risk criteria are met. Moreover, earlier studies have recommended that clinically, radiologically, and pathologically uninvolved lymph node regions should also be irradiated postoperatively with a dose of 52–54 Gy in 30–33 fractions as additional clinical target volumes to eradicate occult metastases. This approach is also dependent on whether intermediate- or high-risk criteria are present [21, 22]. Furthermore, because of different lymphatic drainage and increased likelihood of midline proximity, which is associated with an increased probability of occult metastases of the contralateral side of the neck, bilateral radiation may be indicated for tumors of the base of the tongue compared with tumors of the tonsil [23, 24]. However, neither the recent guidelines of the NCCN nor those of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany formulate precise instructions on how the lymphatic drainage pathways should be irradiated, especially für pathologically negative pathways, and do not differentiate between p16-negative and p16-positive OPSCC [16, 17, 19]. Thus, patients with pathologically non-involved cervical lymph node regions, or even entire non-involved neck sides, experience different RT regimens postoperatively, depending on the tumor board discussion or the treating physician. To date, there are no accepted guidelines for PO(C)RT of the pathologically node-negative contralateral neck in patients with OPSCC. This study aimed to determine if the omission of postoperative radiotherapy of the contralateral pathologically node-negative neck affects oncologic outcomes in a distinct patient cohort. Materials and methods Patients We performed a retrospective patient chart review of women and men with OPSCC diagnosed between January 2010 and January 2020 with primary surgical treatment, including bilateral neck dissection based on clinical evidence for either cervical lymph node involvement (cN+) or evidence based on the location of the primary tumor for possible bilateral involvement according to NCCN and AWMF recommendations, followed by PO(C)RT. Regarding unilateral or bilateral irradiation of the neck, the decision was based on the tumor board discussion and made by the treating radiation therapists, mainly depending on the midline proximity and size of the tumor, the depth of infiltration into the base of the tongue, and number of pathologically involved cervical lymph nodes. The exclusion criteria included previous head and neck malignancies and disease progression during treatment. Using trained coordinators, data were obtained from a database management system using the Gießen Tumor Documentation System (GTDS; https://www.med.uni-giessen.de/akkk/gtds/), which thoroughly documents patients’ features using the original pathology report. In addition, a review of patients’ digital records was conducted using our local documentation systems myMedis KIS (Getinge) and Soarian® Clinicals (Cerner). Cases were identified using the German modification of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-GM) for Oncology topography codes C05.1–9, C09.-, C10.-, and C01.-. From an initial cohort of 347 patients, those without information on tumor stage, tumor region, patient characteristics, treatment protocol, relevant data regarding p16 status or margin status were excluded from the analyses (n = 231). Furthermore, we excluded patients with unknown lymph node status (n = 17), pathologically bilateral positive lymph nodes (n = 12) and involved margins (n = 3). There were 84 patients with ipsilateral pathologically positive lymph nodes and uni- or bilateral PO(C)RT in the final analytical sample and each patient1 was directly treated or examined during a follow-up routine by at least one of the authors. Endpoints The primary endpoint was tumor-free survival (TFS), defined as duration from initial diagnosis to the date of tumor recurrence, nodal relapse, or distant metastasis occurrence. Secondary endpoints were cause-specific-survival (CSS), defined as duration from initial diagnosis to the date of death due to the diagnosed disease and overall survival (OS), defined as duration from initial diagnosis to the to the date of death due to any cause. Statistical analysis Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan–Meier method for OS, TFS and CSS, using the log-rank test to assess differences in survival among various subgroups. Cases presenting a missing value for at least one of the modeling variables were excluded from the analyses (listwise deletion). Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All data analyses were performed using STATA MP, version 17 (Stata Corp LLC, College Station, TX, USA). Results Sample characteristics Among the 84 included patients, irradiation was performed with IMRT with a dose of 60–66 Gy for the surgical bed and the region of affected lymph nodes with 30–33 fractions (once per day, five fractions per week), depending on pathologic risk factors. Uninvolved lymph node regions were irradiated with a dose of 50–54 Gy in 30–33 fractions. The mean follow-up period was 36.2 months (SD 27.6 months). The baseline characteristics and treatment data are shown in Table 1.Table 1 Sample characteristics n % Age at diagnosis  Mean (SD) 63.5 (9.1) Sex  Male 58 69.1  Female 26 30.9 Tumor stage (AJCC8)  I 55 65.5  II 16 19.1  III 5 5.9  IV 8 9.5 Tumor region  BOT 21 25.0  Tonsil 56 66.7  Other 7 8.3 p16 status (IHC)  Negative 10 11.9  Positive 74 88.1 HPV–DNA status  Negative 16 20.3  Positive 63 79.7 pN-stage (AJCC8) p16 negative  0 0 0.0  1 3 30.0  2 0 0.0  2a 1 10.0  2b 5 50.0  2c 0 0.0  3a 0 0.0  3b 1 10.0 p16 positive  0 0 0.0  1 59 79.7  2 15 20.3 Irradiation site  Unilateral 41 48.8  Bilateral 43 51.2 Extranodal extension  Negative 43 51.2  Positive 39 46.4  Missing values 2 2.4 Margin status  Clear 66 78.6  Close 18 21.4 Chemoradiation  No 59 70.2  Yes 25 29.8 Other regions: palatopharyngeal arch, posterior pharyngeal wall, lateral pharyngeal wall, uvula n quantity, % proportion, SD standard deviation, BOT base of tongue, DNA deoxyribonucleic acid, HPV human papilloma virus, IHC immunohistochemistry, PCR polymerase chain reaction Survival analysis TFS of patients with unilateral versus bilateral irradiation There were no differences in TFS between patients who had been irradiated unilaterally or bilaterally, with 5-year survival rates of 93.3% for unilateral irradiation and 86.9% for bilateral irradiation (p = 0.106) (Fig. 1a). In addition, stratified analyses by p16 status showed no correlations in TFS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 95.5% for unilateral irradiation and 96.2% for bilateral irradiation in p16 positivity, and 5-year survival rates of 66.7% for unilateral irradiation and 16.7% for bilateral irradiation in p16 negativity (global: p < 0.772; p16-positive: p = 0.843; p16-negative: p = 0.829) (Fig. 1b).Fig. 1 Kaplan–Meier plots of tumor-free survival showing a no survival difference when comparing unilateral-to-bilateral postoperative [chemo-)radiotherapy (PO(C)RT) (log-rank (global): p = 0.106], b no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PO(C)RT stratified by p16 status [log-rank (global): p < 0.772; log-rank (stratified): p16-positive: p = 0.843; p16-negative: p = 0.829], c no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral (PO(C)RT stratified by tonsil and/or BOT versus other regions [log-rank (global): p = 0.160; log-rank (stratified): tonsil and/or BOT: p = 0.092; other regions: p = 0.925], d no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PO(C)RT stratified by tonsil versus BOT [log-rank (global): p = 0.072; log-rank (stratified): tonsil: p = 0.128; BOT: p = 0.339], and e no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PORT stratified whether or not CRT was performed [log-rank (global): p = 0.085; log-rank (stratified): without CRT: p = 0.161; CRT: p = 0.307]. Other regions: palatopharyngeal arch, posterior pharyngeal wall, lateral pharyngeal wall, uvula. BOT base of tongue, CRT chemoradiotherapy Stratified analyses of TFS by region (tonsil and/or BOT versus palatopharyngeal arch/posterior pharyngeal wall/lateral pharyngeal wall/uvula, also described as "other") showed no correlations in TFS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 95.7% for unilateral irradiation and 86.2% for bilateral irradiation in tumors arising from the tonsil and/or BOT, and a 5-year survival rate of 100% for bilateral irradiation in tumors arising from a region declared as "other" (global: p = 0.160; tonsil and/or BOT region: p = 0.092; other region: p = 0.925). A statement on the 5-year survival rate was not possible in patients with unilateral irradiation and with tumors arising from the region declared as "other" because of censoring (Fig. 1c). Stratified analyses by region (tonsil versus BOT) showed no correlations in TFS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 95% for unilateral irradiation and 83.1% for bilateral irradiation in tumor arising from the palatine tonsil, and 5-year survival rates of 100.% for unilateral irradiation and 91% for bilateral irradiation in tumor arising from the BOT (global: p = 0.072; tonsil: p = 0.128; BOT: p = 0.339) (Fig. 1d). Stratified analyses of TFS according whether or not CRT was performed showed no correlation in TFS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 92.1% for unilateral irradiation and 81.1% for bilateral irradiation without CRT, and 5-year survival rates of 100% for unilateral irradiation and 94.2% for bilateral irradiation and CRT (global: p = 0.085; without CRT: p = 0.161; CRT: p = 0.307) (Fig. 1e). CSS of patients with unilateral versus bilateral irradiation There were no differences in CSS in patients irradiated unilaterally or bilaterally with 5-year survival rates of 93.4% for unilateral irradiation and 87.6% for bilateral irradiation (p = 0.172) (Fig. 2a). Furthermore, stratified analyses by p16 status showed no differences in CSS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 95.9% for unilateral irradiation and 89.5% for bilateral irradiation in p16 positivity and a 5-year survival rate of 83.4% for bilateral irradiation in p16 negativity (global: p < 0.310; p16-positive: p = 0.068; p16-negative: p = 0.601). A statement on the 5-year survival rate was not possible in patients with unilateral irradiation and p16 negativity due to censoring (Fig. 2b).Fig. 2 Kaplan–Meier plots of cause-specific survival showing a no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral postoperative [chemo-)radiotherapy (PO(C)RT) (log-rank (global): p = 0.172], b no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PO(C)RT stratified by p16 status [log-rank (global): p < 0.310; log-rank (stratified): p16-positive: p = 0.068; p16-negative: p = 0.601], c survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral (PO(C)RT stratified by region with improved CSS in patients with unilateral PO(C)RT with tumors declared as tonsil and/or BOT [log-rank (global): p = 0.062; log-rank (stratified): tonsil and/or BOT: p = 0.029; other regions: p = 0.786], d no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral (PO(C)RT stratified by tonsil versus BOT [log-rank (global): p = 0.062; log-rank (stratified): tonsil: p = 0.053; BOT: p = 0.462], and e no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PORT stratified whether or not CRT was performed [log-rank (global): p = 0.056; log-rank (stratified): without CRT: p = 0.186; CRT: p = 0.152]. Other regions: palatopharyngeal arch, posterior pharyngeal wall, lateral pharyngeal wall, uvula. BOT base of tongue, CRT chemoradiotherapy Stratified analyses of CSS by region (tonsil and/or BOT versus “other”) showed improved CSS in patients with unilateral irradiation with tumors arising in a region declared as tonsil and/or BOT compared to patients with bilateral irradiation and tumors in the same region throughout the observation period of up to 60 months, with 5-year survival rates of 95.9% for unilateral irradiation and 86.8% for bilateral irradiation (global: p = 0.062; tonsil and/or BOT: p = 0.029). In addition, no correlations were present in CSS in patients with tumors arising from a region declared as “other”, regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with a 5-year survival rate of for 100% for bilateral irradiation (other regions: p = 0.786) (Fig. 2c). A statement about the 5-year survival rate was not possible in patients with unilateral irradiation and with tumors arising fr2om the region declared as "other" due to censoring (Fig. 2c). Stratified analyses by region (tonsil versus BOT) and by irradiation side showed no differences in CSS in patients regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 100% for unilateral irradiation and 93.8% for bilateral irradiation in tumors arising from the tonsil, and a 5-year survival rate of 75% for unilateral irradiation and 76.7% for bilateral irradiation in tumors arising from a region declared as BOT (global: p = 0.062; tonsil and/or BOT region: p = 0.053; other region: p = 0.462) (Fig. 2d). Stratified analyses of CCS according whether or not CRT was performed showed no correlation in CCS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 92.3% for unilateral irradiation and 93.4% for bilateral irradiation without CRT, and 5-year survival rates of 100% for unilateral irradiation and 82.7% for bilateral irradiation and CRT (global: p = 0.056; without CRT: p = 0.186; CRT: p = 0.152) (Fig. 2e). OS of patients with unilateral versus bilateral irradiation Analyses by irradiation side showed differences in OS when comparing unilateral to bilateral PO(C)RT with improved survival in patients with unilateral PO(C)RT, with 5-year survival rates of 89.3% for unilateral irradiation and 77.1% for bilateral irradiation (p = 0.043) (Fig. 3a). In addition, stratified analyses by p16 status showed no correlation with OS in patients regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 95.9% for unilateral irradiation and 80.3% for bilateral irradiation in the case of p16 positivity and 5-year survival rates of 69.1% for bilateral irradiation in the case of p16 negativity (global: p < 0.310; p16-positive: p = 0.068; p16-negative: p = 0.386). A statement about the 5-year survival rate was not possible in patients with unilateral irradiation and p16 negativity due to censoring (Fig. 3b).Fig. 3 Kaplan–Meier plots of overall survival (OS) showing a survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral postoperative [chemo-)radiotherapy (PO(C)RT) with improved survival in patients with unilateral PO(C)RT (log-rank (global): p = 0.043], b no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PO(C)RT stratified by p16 status [log-rank (global): p < 0.310; log-rank (stratified): p16-positive: p = 0.068; p16-negative: p = 0.601], c survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PO(C)RT stratified by region with improved OS in patients with unilateral PO(C)RT with tumors in a region declared as tonsils and/or BOT [log-rank (global): p = 0.062; log-rank (stratified): tonsil and/or BOT: p = 0.029; other regions: p = 0.786], d no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral (PO(C)RT stratified by tonsil versus BOT [log-rank (global): p = 0.098; log-rank (stratified): tonsil: p = 0.154; BOT: p = 0.386], and e no survival difference when comparing unilateral to bilateral PORT stratified whether or not CRT was performed [log-rank (global): p = 0.056; log-rank (stratified): without CRT: p = 0.186; CRT: p = 0.152]. Other regions: palatopharyngeal arch, posterior pharyngeal wall, lateral pharyngeal wall, uvula. BOT base of tongue, CRT chemoradiotherapy Furthermore, stratified analyses by region (tonsil and/or BOT versus “other”) and by irradiation side showed markedly improved OS in patients with unilateral irradiation with tumors in a region declared as tonsil and/or BOT compared to patients with bilateral irradiation and tumors in the same region throughout the observation period of up to 60 months, with 5-year survival rates of 91.7% for unilateral irradiation and 75.1% for bilateral irradiation (global: p = 0.062; tonsil and/or BOT region: p = 0.029). Moreover, no correlations were present in OS in patients with tumors arising from a region declared as "other", regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with a 5-year survival rate of 100% for bilateral irradiation (other region: p = 0.786). A statement about the 5-year survival rate was not possible in patients with unilateral irradiation and with tumors arising from the region declared as "other" due to censoring (Fig. 3c). Stratified analyses by region (tonsil versus BOT) showed no correlations in OS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 95% for unilateral irradiation and 79.4% for bilateral irradiation in tumor arising from the palatine tonsil, and 5-year survival rates of 75.% for unilateral irradiation and 69.5% for bilateral irradiation in tumor arising from the BOT (global: p = 0.098; tonsil: p = 0.154; BOT: p = 0.386) (Fig. 3d). Stratified analyses of OS according whether or not CRT was performed showed no correlation in CCS regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral irradiation was performed, with 5-year survival rates of 87.6% for unilateral irradiation and 81.8% for bilateral irradiation without CRT, and 5-year survival rates of 100% for unilateral irradiation and 84.2% for bilateral irradiation and CRT (global: p = 0.056; without CRT: p = 0.186; CRT: p = 0.152) (Fig. 3e). Discussion The main objective of this study was to investigate the possible impact of omission of PORT to the contralateral pathologically node-negative neck on disease control and patient survival, contributing to a higher risk of tumor recurrence or death. Over a maximum observation period of 60 months, there was no worsening of TFS, CSS, or OS in our patient cohort when only unilateral irradiation was performed, thus omitting the irradiation of the contralateral node-negative side of the neck. This is consistent with studies that have already investigated the reduction of radiation dose on patient survival, particularly in HPV-driven disease [25, 26]. Because patients with HPV-driven OPSCC have a lower risk of death and are younger, the side effects and long-term effects of CRT and RT may be more apparent here, including dermatitis, mucositis, and dysphagia as well as chronic xerostomia, which can have an extraordinary influence on quality of life [27, 28]. Nevertheless, the radiation dose to the neck organs, especially the salivary glands, oral cavity, mandible, laryngeal structures, esophagus, and brachial plexus, is considered to be a risk factor for side effects [29–31]. Consequently, a corresponding reduction of radiation dose can lead to improved quality of life with improved swallowing function and reduced xerostomia, regardless of whether HPV-driven disease is present. While there are many studies investigating a reduction in radiation dose, few have studied whether unaffected cervical lymph nodes need to be irradiated, although studies have consistently confirmed that the lymph node metastasis rate of the contralateral neck is significantly lower than that of the ipsilateral neck [32]. For example, patients with OPSCC receiving bilateral PO(C)RT have already been shown to have safe omission of radiologically uninvolved contralateral retropharyngeal lymph nodes and cervical region II lymph nodes, leading to a reduced contralateral parotid dose [33]. In this regard, our data are consistent even show a proportionally slightly better OS in patients with unilateral irradiation as a secondary endpoint. In this regard, bilateral irradiation may lead to a poorer prognosis due to the increased occurrence of side effects and long-term damage, which may justify the comparatively poorer prognosis in this specific comparison. Although this correlation should not be overestimated in a retrospective analysis, it appears to support the statement that PORT of the pathologically node-negative neck side does not improve patient survival and could, therefore, besides a dose reduction, be part of a de-escalation strategy in future trials. Regarding the positive and negative p16 status in our distinct cohort, there were no differences in terms of TFS, CSS, or OS, regardless of whether unilateral or bilateral PO(C)RT was performed. Thus, it appears in our cohort that a pathologically negative neck site, even in p16-negative tumors, does not require PORT from a patient survival perspective and does not affect the generally worse prognosis of these patients, which should definitely be verified by prospective controlled comparative studies. Similarly, in our cohort, the proven equal prognosis of unilateral and bilateral PORT in only unilateral pathologically positive cervical lymph nodes of p16-positive and p16-negative OPSSC could support a de-escalation of therapy in the sense of omitting the contralateral node-negative neck. This underscores the need not only for a differentiated consideration of p16-positive and p16-negative OPSSCs as distinct tumor entities, but also for more prospective randomized control studies to prove this hypothesis and eventually adapt the RT guidelines, especially with regard to p16-negative tumors, as previously, de-escalation has mainly been requested only for p16-positive tumors. Stratified by region, our data showed increased CSS and OS in patients with unilateral PO(C)RT with tumors in a region declared as tonsil and/or BOT, and, therefore, mainly lymphoepithelial tissue, compared with bilateral PO(C)RT. When the tumor originated from the palatopharyngeal arch, the posterior and lateral pharyngeal walls, or the uvula, and was, therefore, predominantly non-lymphoepithelial tissue, no differences in survival were observed when unilateral and bilateral PO(C)RT were compared. Focusing on OPSCC and the distinction in terms of p16 status and HPV status, many studies have not considered the oropharyngeal subsites and few studies have followed up with histopathological investigations in this regard [34]. Moreover, histopathology showed that OPSCCs could be divided into lymphoepithelial and non-lymphoepithelial subcategories, which also led us to examine our patients with regard to the corresponding subregion. Here, HPV prevalence was shown to be higher in lymphoepithelial tissue with significant discordance of HPV DNA and p16 positivity compared to non-lymphoepithelial tissue [35]. Furthermore, patients with OPSCC arising from lymphoepithelial tissue (tonsils, BOT) had a better clinical outcome when their tumors were both HPV DNA- and p16-positive than when they were only p16-positive, whereas a similar difference was not observed in patients with tumors that were histomorphologically not arising from lymphoepithelial tissue [36]. In our cohort, unilateral irradiation of tumors of lymphoepithelial origin not only appears to be sufficient, but even outperforms the prognosis of bilateral irradiation. In line with this, another study reported that patients with HPV-positive lymphoepithelial tonsillar or BOT carcinoma were associated with a better clinical prognosis. However, in comparison, the authors found no difference in prognosis in patients with HPV-positive OPSCC starting from non-lymphoepithelial tissue [37]. In terms of survival and tumors of the tonsil and BOT, our study found no association between OS, CSS and TFS and unilateral or bilateral irradiation. This is particularly interesting, because tumors of the BOT may be more midline and thus could theoretically tempt the radiation therapist to perform bilateral irradiation. Nevertheless, the lack of correlation is consistent with the suggestion of Last et al., who suspects that patients do not benefit from contralateral irradiation when the neck is pathologically negative for tumors of the BOT [24]. Therefore, according to our data, it may be considered to include and investigate the omission of irradiation of the contralateral side in further prospective randomized comparative studies regarding patient survival in case of unilateral positive cervical lymph nodes. With regard to tumors of non-lymphoepithelial origin, no better prognosis can be observed than when only unilateral irradiation is used, even if there is a generally lower probability of HPV-driven disease. Thus, this appears to be a similar situation to patients with a proven negative p16 status, where, in the presence of a pathologically negative neck, bilateral irradiation does not affect survival in our cohort. Hence, it does not seem to make a difference whether irradiation is performed on both sides, further investigation in the form of prospective randomized comparative studies should, therefore, be considered here as well. To investigate whether high-risk factors such as ENE affect survival in patients who have received guideline-guided POCRT, we divided the cohort into those with or without CRT. Here, there were no differences in TFS, CSS, or OS between uni- or bilateral PORT, regardless of whether or not CRT was performed. This could imply that in our retrospective analysis, patients with high-risk factors do not necessarily benefit from irradiation of the pathologically node-negative neck side and concurrent adjuvant chemotherapy. These findings may be in the same line as several clinical trials involving de-escalation of postoperative therapy in patients with HPV positive OPSCCs. For example, the MC1273 trial demonstrated comparable locoregional control to historical controls after reduced postoperative radiation dose and concurrent chemotherapy, even in patients with ENE [38]. Other studies such as the ECOG 3311 (NCT01898494), the Adjuvant De-escalation, Extracapsular Spread, p16 Positive, Transoral (ADEPT) study, the DART–HPV (De-Escalated Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer) study (NCT02908477), or the single institution study at the University of Pennsylvania (NCT02159703) are investigating different postoperative deintensification strategies, such as a lower radiation dose, a shorter radiation regimen, or omitting radiation in certain regions such as the tumor bed, with some studies already having data to support deintensification [39–42]. In this regard, it should be noted that our cohort is also primarily comprised of patients with HPV-driven disease. It is important that de-intensification strategies are thoroughly investigated in prospective studies to best define the clinical parameters for treatment decisions. Accordingly, we are eagerly awaiting the results of this and other numerous ongoing clinical trials to best help this patient population and hope that our retrospective data can assist in the further development of hypotheses regarding this significant disease entity. In conclusion, we believe that certain factors should be considered and investigated in further studies regarding omission of PORT on the contralateral pathologically node-negative side of the neck. In particular, unilateral irradiation should be evaluated when the tumor occurs in lymphoepithelial tissue, because TFS, CSS, and OS were not only equivalent to bilateral irradiation, but OS and CSS even exceeded that of bilateral irradiation. It should be emphasized in this context that this also applies to tumors of the BOT with a pathologically negative neck. In this regard, it should be said that prospective studies are currently already being conducted, especially dose reduction of RT and CRT in HPV positive OPSCCs, which show better functional as well as oncologic outcome and also advocate larger, multicentric control studies [43, 44]. Therefore, our study, along with others, support prospective randomized comparative studies to test our hypotheses and recommends actions to revise existing guidelines to better standardize and de-intensify radiotherapy in terms of omitting PORT of the contralateral pathologically node-negative neck, which could hereby be part of a de-escalation strategy in future trials to reduce side effects. Strength and limitations Limitations include the purely retrospective evaluation of the cohort and inclusion of only operated patients with unilateral positive lymph nodes and that a majority of OPSCC originate from lymphoepithelial tissue and are p16-positive. This circumstance limits the statements on p16-negative tumors. In addition, regarding possible confounding variables, such as TNM stage, ENE, margin status or performance of CRT, it should be mentioned that a confounding effect cannot be excluded as the groups might differ regarding these factors. Furthermore, the limited sample size due to a large documentation failure, the low number of tumors in higher stages, as well as the partly enlarged confidence intervals, must be mentioned as possible limitations. In addition, no midline proximity of the tumors could be regularly traced in our data, which would be quite interesting for further investigations regarding bilateral irradiation. The strengths of this study are its cohort from a tertiary referral university hospital, and its restrictively condensed nature with a small corridor of clinical features. Author contributions All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by FJ, NM and AB. The first draft of the manuscript was written by FJ and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Data availability The data come from an internal clinic data depository, these were anonymized and can, therefore, not be traced, the raw data are available at any time on request. Declarations Conflict of interest The authors have no financial or non-financial interests to disclose. Ethics approval and patient consent statement This article does not contain any experimental study with human participants performed by any of the authors. No identifying information is included in this article. Written informed consent was obtained from all individuals before intervention including data processing. For this specific work, formal consent is not required because of its retrospective nature, according to § 12 HmbKHG (Hamburg Hospital Act). Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Nikolaus Möckelmann and Arne Böttcher contributed equally and share senior authorship. ==== Refs References 1. Ferlay J Colombet M Soerjomataram I Estimating the global cancer incidence and mortality in 2018: GLOBOCAN sources and methods Int J Cancer 2019 144 1941 1953 10.1002/ijc.31937 30350310 2. Marur S Forastiere AA Head and neck cancer: changing epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment Mayo Clin Proc 2008 83 489 501 10.4065/83.4.489 18380996 3. Chaturvedi AK Anderson WF Lortet-Tieulent J Worldwide trends in incidence rates for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers JCO 2013 31 4550 4559 10.1200/JCO.2013.50.3870 4. Gillison ML Broutian T Pickard RKL Prevalence of oral HPV infection in the United States, 2009–2010 JAMA 2012 307 693 10.1001/jama.2012.101 22282321 5. Sturgis EM Cinciripini PM Trends in head and neck cancer incidence in relation to smoking prevalence: an emerging epidemic of human papillomavirus-associated cancers? Cancer 2007 110 1429 1435 10.1002/cncr.22963 17724670 6. Mehanna H Beech T Nicholson T Prevalence of human papillomavirus in oropharyngeal and nonoropharyngeal head and neck cancer-systematic review and meta-analysis of trends by time and region Head Neck 2013 35 747 755 10.1002/hed.22015 22267298 7. Fakhry C Westra WH Li S Improved survival of patients with human papillomavirus-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in a prospective clinical trial JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2008 100 261 269 10.1093/jnci/djn011 18270337 8. Kimple RJ Smith MA Blitzer GC Enhanced radiation sensitivity in HPV-positive head and neck cancer Can Res 2013 73 4791 4800 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-0587 9. Zech HB Berger J Mansour WY Patient derived ex vivo tissue slice cultures demonstrate a profound DNA double-strand break repair defect in HPV-positive oropharyngeal head and neck cancer Radiother Oncol 2022 168 138 146 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.01.017 35093407 10. Sobin LH Gospodarowicz MK Wittekind C International Union against Cancer TNM classification of malignant tumours 2010 7 Chichester, Hoboken Wiley-Blackwell 11. Brierley J Gospodarowicz MK Wittekind C TNM classification of malignant tumours 2017 8 Chichester, Hoboken Wiley 12. O’Sullivan B Huang SH Su J Development and validation of a staging system for HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer by the International Collaboration on Oropharyngeal cancer Network for Staging (ICON-S): a multicentre cohort study Lancet Oncol 2016 17 440 451 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00560-4 26936027 13. Johnson DE Burtness B Leemans CR Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma Nat Rev Dis Primers 2020 6 92 10.1038/s41572-020-00224-3 33243986 14. Robbins KT Shaha AR Medina JE Consensus statement on the classification and terminology of neck dissection Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008 134 536 10.1001/archotol.134.5.536 18490577 15. Byers RM Neck dessection: concepts, controversies, and technique Semin Surg Oncol 1991 7 9 13 10.1002/ssu.2980070104 2003186 16. Pfister DG Spencer S Adelstein D Head and neck cancers, version 2.2020, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 2020 18 873 898 10.6004/jnccn.2020.0031 17. Wolff K-D Leitlinienpogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF): S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik und Therapie des Mundhöhlenkarzinoms, Langversion 3.0, 2021, AWMF Registernummer: 007/100OL. https://www.leitlinienprogrammonkologie.de/leitlinien/mundhoehlenkarzinom/. Accessed 16 Aug 2022 18. Weinstein GS Quon H O’Malley BW Selective neck dissection and deintensified postoperative radiation and chemotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer: a subset analysis of the university of pennsylvania transoral robotic surgery trial Laryngoscope 2010 120 1749 1755 10.1002/lary.21021 20717944 19. Bernier J Cooper JS Pajak TF Defining risk levels in locally advanced head and neck cancers: a comparative analysis of concurrent postoperative radiation plus chemotherapy trials of the EORTC (#22931) and RTOG (# 9501) Head Neck 2005 27 843 850 10.1002/hed.20279 16161069 20. Hartford AC Palisca MG Eichler TJ American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) and American College of Radiology (ACR) practice guidelines for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009 73 9 14 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.04.049 19100920 21. Chao KSC Wippold FJ Ozyigit G Determination and delineation of nodal target volumes for head-and-neck cancer based on patterns of failure in patients receiving definitive and postoperative IMRT Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002 53 1174 1184 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02881-X 12128118 22. Grégoire V Coche E Cosnard G Selection and delineation of lymph node target volumes in head and neck conformal radiotherapy. Proposal for standardizing terminology and procedure based on the surgical experience Radiother Oncol 2000 56 135 150 10.1016/S0167-8140(00)00202-4 10927132 23. Capote-Moreno A Naval L Muñoz-Guerra MF Prognostic Factors influencing contralateral neck lymph node metastases in oral and oropharyngeal carcinoma J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010 68 268 275 10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.071 20116694 24. Last AS Pipkorn P Chen S Risk and rate of occult contralateral nodal disease in surgically treated patients with human papillomavirus−related squamous cell carcinoma of the base of the tongue JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020 146 50 10.1001/jamaoto.2019.3277 31697348 25. Chen AM Felix C Wang P-C Reduced-dose radiotherapy for human papillomavirus-associated squamous-cell carcinoma of the oropharynx: a single-arm, phase 2 study Lancet Oncol 2017 18 803 811 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30246-2 28434660 26. Rühle A Grosu A-L Nicolay NH De-escalation strategies of (chemo)radiation for head-and-neck squamous cell cancers—HPV and beyond Cancers 2021 13 2204 10.3390/cancers13092204 34064321 27. Boscolo-Rizzo P Stellin M Fuson R Long-term quality of life after treatment for locally advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma: surgery and postoperative radiotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiation Oral Oncol 2009 45 953 957 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2009.06.005 19665919 28. Verdonck-de Leeuw IM Buffart LM Heymans MW The course of health-related quality of life in head and neck cancer patients treated with chemoradiation: a prospective cohort study Radiother Oncol 2014 110 422 428 10.1016/j.radonc.2014.01.002 24582144 29. Kelly JR Husain ZA Burtness B Treatment de-intensification strategies for head and neck cancer Eur J Cancer 2016 68 125 133 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.09.006 27755996 30. Deasy JO Moiseenko V Marks L Radiotherapy dose-volume effects on salivary gland function Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010 76 S58 S63 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.06.090 20171519 31. Rancati T Schwarz M Allen AM Radiation dose-volume effects in the larynx and pharynx Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010 76 S64 S69 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.03.079 20171520 32. Mukherji SK Armao D Joshi VM Cervical nodal metastases in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: what to expect Head Neck 2001 23 995 1005 10.1002/hed.1144 11754505 33. Iyizoba-Ebozue Z Murray LJ Ramasamy S Radiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma with an uninvolved contralateral neck: the safety of omission of contralateral high level II and retropharyngeal lymph nodes from elective target volumes Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021 33 331 339 10.1016/j.clon.2020.12.007 33358282 34. Haeggblom L Ramqvist T Tommasino M Time to change perspectives on HPV in oropharyngeal cancer. A systematic review of HPV prevalence per oropharyngeal sub-site the last 3 years Papillomavirus Res 2017 4 1 11 10.1016/j.pvr.2017.05.002 29179862 35. Garnaes E Kiss K Andersen L A high and increasing HPV prevalence in tonsillar cancers in Eastern Denmark, 2000–2010: the largest registry-based study to date: a high and increasing HPV prevalence in tonsillar cancers in Eastern Denmark Int J Cancer 2015 136 2196 2203 10.1002/ijc.29254 25283302 36. Garnaes E Frederiksen K Kiss K Double positivity for HPV DNA/p16 in tonsillar and base of tongue cancer improves prognostication: Insights from a large population-based study: double positivity for HPV DNA/p16 in TS`CCs and BSCCs improves prognostication Int J Cancer 2016 139 2598 2605 10.1002/ijc.30389 27537425 37. Ljøkjel B Lybak S Haave H The impact of HPV infection on survival in a geographically defined cohort of oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) patients in whom surgical treatment has been one main treatment Acta Otolaryngol 2014 134 636 645 10.3109/00016489.2014.886336 24828351 38. Ma DJ Price KA Moore EJ Phase II evaluation of aggressive dose de-escalation for adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in human papillomavirus-associated oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma JCO 2019 37 1909 1918 10.1200/JCO.19.00463 39. Ferris RL Flamand Y Weinstein GS Phase II randomized trial of transoral surgery and low-dose intensity modulated radiation therapy in resectable p16+ locally advanced oropharynx cancer: an ECOG-ACRIN cancer research group trial (E3311) JCO 2022 40 138 149 10.1200/JCO.21.01752 40. Post operative adjuvant therapy de-intensification trial for human papillomavirus-related, p16+ oropharynx cancer (ADEPT). Secondary Post operative adjuvant therapy de-intensification trial for human papillomavirus-related, p16+ oropharynx cancer (ADEPT). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01687413. Accessed 15 Mar 2023 41. (2023) Evaluation of de-escalated adjuvant radiation therapy for human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharynx cancer. Secondary evaluation of de-escalated adjuvant radiation therapy for human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharynx cancer. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02908477 42. Swisher-McClure S Lukens JN Aggarwal C A phase 2 trial of alternative volumes of oropharyngeal irradiation for de-intensification (AVOID): omission of the resected primary tumor bed after transoral robotic surgery for human papilloma virus-related squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020 106 725 732 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.11.021 31785337 43. Seiwert TY Foster CC Blair EA OPTIMA: a phase II dose and volume de-escalation trial for human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer Ann Oncol 2019 30 297 302 10.1093/annonc/mdy522 30481287 44. Foster CC Seiwert TY MacCracken E Dose and volume de-escalation for human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer is associated with favorable posttreatment functional outcomes Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020 107 662 671 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.04.014 32311416