The site of the Media Sphera Publishers contains materials intended solely for healthcare professionals.
By closing this message, you confirm that you are a certified medical professional or a student of a medical educational institution.

Spirin D.S.

FGBU "NII neĭrokhirurgii im. akad. N.N. Burdenko" RAMN, Moskva

Chernov I.V.

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia

Cherekaev V.A.

NII neĭrokhirurgii im. akad. N.N. Burdenko RAMN, Moskva

Kalinin P.L.

NII neĭrokhirurgii im. N.N. Burdenko RAMN, Moskva

Nazarov V.V.

FGBU "NII neĭrokhirurgii im. akad. N.N. Burdenko" RAMN, Moskva;
Otdelenie neĭrokhirurgii Nizhegorodskogo nauchno-issledovatel'skogo instituta travmatologii i ortopedii

Muzyshev I.A.

Burdenko Neurosurgical Center, Moscow, Russia

Absaliamova O.V.

FGBU "Nauchno-issledovatel'skiĭ institut neĭrokhirurgii im. akad. N.N. Burdenko"

Kobiakov G.L.

GBU NII neĭrokhirurgii im. N.N. Burdenko

Vetlova E.R.

FGBU "NII neĭrokhirurgii im. akad. N.N. Burdenko" RAMN, Moskva

Treatment of primary craniofacial (sinonasal) malignant tumors affecting the anterior and middle skull base

Authors:

Spirin D.S., Chernov I.V., Cherekaev V.A., Kalinin P.L., Nazarov V.V., Muzyshev I.A., Absaliamova O.V., Kobiakov G.L., Vetlova E.R.

More about the authors

Journal: Burdenko's Journal of Neurosurgery. 2020;84(1): 101‑108

Read: 8769 times


To cite this article:

Spirin DS, Chernov IV, Cherekaev VA, et al. . Treatment of primary craniofacial (sinonasal) malignant tumors affecting the anterior and middle skull base. Burdenko's Journal of Neurosurgery. 2020;84(1):101‑108. (In Russ., In Engl.)
https://doi.org/10.17116/neiro202084011101

Recommended articles:
Immu­nology of the cervix in normal and pathological conditions (literature review). Russian Journal of Human Reproduction. 2024;(5):108-117
Lung tube­rculosis and mali­gnant neoplasms: the current state of the problem. Russian Journal of Preventive Medi­cine. 2025;(3):122-127
Ethmoid laby­rinth cancer with exte­nsion into the orbi­tal cavity. Russian Bulletin of Otorhinolaryngology. 2025;(4):119-122

Abbreviations

RFS — recurrence-free survival

HPV — human papillomavirus

OS — overall survival

PET — positron emission tomography

DM — dura mater

EGFR — epidermal growth factor receptor

SNUC — sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma

TNM (abbreviation for tumor, nodus, metastasis) — international classification of stages of malignant neoplasms

Introduction

Craniofacial (sinonasal) malignancies affecting skull base structures are rare diseases accounting 3—5% of malignancies of the head and neck and 0.2—0.8% of all tumors [1]. These tumors are usually epithelial and, accordingly, characterized by unfavorable prognosis. Craniofacial (sinonasal) malignancies include squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, undifferentiated cancer, neuroendocrine cancer, sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma (SNUC), adenocystic cancer, etc. [2—3].

Most reports devoted to the treatment of skull base malignancies often combine different histological types of tumors and various treatment strategies. Therefore, unified protocols for these patients are absent [4—5] and decision making on optimal treatment strategy is difficult [6].

TNM international classification is used to predict the outcomes in patients with craniofacial primary malignancies. This system is applied for classification of stages of malignant neoplasms [7], since invasion of surrounding structures such as dura mater, cranial nerves, orbit and sphenoid bone is predictor of worse results. Moreover, Ziai H. et al. reported dura mater invasion in more than 50% of patients with craniofacial primary malignancies affecting skull base even if similar neuroimaging data are absent [8—9]. In addition, surgical strategy and consequent application of surgery, chemo- and radiotherapy are based on TNM classification too. However, there are currently no clear standards and recommendations.

Incidence of local lymph node metastases is up to 20% despite the use of all modern methods of treatment of the primary lesion [10]. Local or distant metastases can occur several years after treatment [11].

Some authors reported better outcomes of treatment of skull base squamous cell carcinoma [12—13] in patients with human papillomavirus (HPV). Unfortunately, its presence is not currently taken into account in the choice of treatment strategy.

This review is devoted to the most common craniofacial malignancies: squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma, esthesioneuroblastoma, adenocystic cancer, sinonasal adenocarcinoma.

Squamous cell carcinoma

Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common primary craniofacial malignancy and accounts 89% of all types of these cancers [14—15]. This cancer can arise either de novo from the epithelium of paranasal sinuses and nasal cavity or in combination with inverted papillomas (10%) [16]. However, transformation from papillomas does not affect the outcomes of treatment [17—18].

Sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma affecting skull base structures was traditionally operated through open approaches (combined transfacial and/or transcranial accesses for en-bloc resection) [19—20]. Overall 5-year survival of patients with squamous cell cancer after open surgery and adjuvant therapy was 43—59% [9, 19, 21—24].

The role of endoscopic endonasal approach for resection of these malignancies has been studied in several centers over the past decade [25—28]. It was shown that partial resection results similar outcomes although conventional principle of en-bloc resection is unattainable in endoscopic surgery [20]. However, endoscopic technologies do not imply restrictions on the volume of resection, and, in addition, allow symptomatic treatment and cytoreductive surgery prior to chemoradiotherapy [29]. Currently, the generally accepted treatment strategy for squamous cell carcinoma of skull base and nasal cavity is precisely endoscopic resection of tumor and possible combination with open procedures (in case of spread to the orbit, infratemporal fossa, anterior cranial fossa), radio- and chemotherapy [14, 17, 30].

The University of Pittsburgh presented endoscopic treatment of 34 patients. T3—T4 tumors prevailed (85%). Complete endoscopic endonasal approach was used in 25 patients, combination of transcranial/transfacial and endoscopic endonasal accesses — in 9 cases. Total resection was made in 27 patients, cytoreductive surgery — in 7 cases. Recurrence-free and overall survival was 62% and 78%, respectively [17]. De Almeida J. R. et al. reported CSF leakage followed by meningitis as the only more common complication of endoscopic endonasal surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of skull base and other cancers of this zone (CSF leakage 21%, meningitis 9%) [17]. Dura mater invasion was also determined as unfavorable predictor of long-term survival in various researches [5, 31].

Recently, targeted therapy in the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck has been actively developing. Widespread application of targeted drugs is based on their high selective activity against tumor cells compared with normal tissue cells, targeted effect against carcinogenesis factors and lower treatment toxicity profile [32—33]. These drugs include epidermal growth factor inhibitors, growth factor inhibitors, signaling pathway blockers, drugs for cell growth control, protein synthesis and angiogenesis inhibition [34]. To date, high efficiency of tumor growth factor inhibitors is confirmed in multiple trials.

One of the most perspective drugs for the treatment of malignancies in particular squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck is cetuximab. It is chimeric monoclonal antibody targeted against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). The level of this factor is abnormally elevated in epithelial tumors including squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck [35—36]. Cetuximab is currently approved for the treatment of platinum-resistant metastatic or locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck [37]. The targeted drug nivolumab as antibody to PD-1 (Programmed cell death protein 1) is also approved [38].

Platinum-based adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is usually used after surgery only in cases of positive resection margin and confirmed invasion of lymphovascular and nerve structures [1]. Induction chemotherapy was followed by promising results in the treatment of low-grade squamous cell carcinoma stage T3 – T4. This is initial course of treatment for highly or moderately sensitive tumor if other treatment strategies are impossible. These methods mainly include a combination of Taxane and Platinum followed by surgery and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (partial or complete response was observed in 67% of patients) [39].

Neck irradiation should be considered for locally advanced lesion (T3—T4) due to fairly frequent (23%) metastasis to cervical lymph nodes [1].

All of these protocols are currently being studied in the ECOGACRIN protocol 3163 (EA3163), a randomized clinical trial on comparison of the protocols neoadjuvant chemotherapy + surgery + irradiation and surgery + irradiation in terms of orbit preservation.

Adenocarcinoma

Adenocarcinoma usually occurs in mucosa of ethmoid cells (85%) and olfactory zone (13%).This tumor is 4 times more common in men than in women that is due to professional activity of certain group of specialties associated with exposure to wood dust [40]. These features also determine possible multifocal growth of tumors. Therefore, bilateral resection of ethmoidal labyrinth is recommended [40—41].

Surgical treatment is the main approach for early (T1—T2) cancer. Adjuvant intensity modulated radiotherapy is applied for T3—T4 tumor (high-tech 3D radiotherapy technique for delivery of precise dose to a malignant tumor). This method results very accurate distribution of irradiation dose around the target (tumor) with complex shape with delivery of high dose to the entire volume neoplasm [42]. In 2000, it was shown that endoscopic endonasal resection of craniofacial adenocarcinomas is followed by better outcomes and less incidence of complications [27,29]. In later series, overall survival near 72.7% was reported after endoscopic transnasal resection followed by adjuvant radiotherapy [41]. Nicolai P. reported the largest series of 169 patients with sinonasal adenocarcinomas. Overall and recurrence-free survival rates were 68.9% and 63.6%, respectively [3]. Similar 5-year overall survival was observed by Camp (68%, n=123) and Vergez (62%, n=159) in 2014. As a result of these data, endoscopic transnasal resection with or without adjuvant radiotherapy became preferable for sinonasal adenocarcinomas instead of open procedures. The last ones are applied only in patients with invasion of anterior cranial fossa and frontal sinus.

Preventive irradiation of the entire brain may be considered at the late stages if invasion of cerebral meninges is suspected [3]. Cervical lymph node metastases are observed only in 7% of cases. Therefore, their irradiation is not routinely performed [1]. The protocol involving induction chemotherapy based on cisplatin, fluorouracil and leucovorin and subsequent surgery and radiotherapy was effective and perspective for T3—T4 tumors with functionally active p53 protein [43].

Sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma (SNUC)

This highly aggressive carcinoma of uncertain histogenesis with or without neuroendocrine differentiation. This caner usually manifests as a widespread tumor with greater ability to metastasize compared to conventional squamous cell carcinoma [44]. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by either chemoradiotherapy or surgical treatment with further postoperative irradiation shows fairly good outcomes even at the late stages of disease [45–46].

Histopathological features of undifferentiated carcinoma of paranasal sinuses are similar to those of olfactory neuroblastoma and neuroendocrine carcinoma [44]. The nuances of differentiation of these neoplasms are not purely methodological, since there are significant differences in prognosis and treatment strategies. However, none of these strategies is completely accepted. Al-Mamgani et al. reported 21 patients who were divided into the groups depending on treatment protocol (chemoradiotherapy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery) [47]. Multivariate analysis of local growth control was compared considering invasion grade and treatment strategy. The best survival rate was reported in this sample of patients (74%). Therefore, individual approach is preferable over any generally accepted strategy.

Sinonasal adenocarcinoma

Sinonasal adenocarcinoma is characterized by high tendency to perineural spread (for example, along trigeminal nerve) and bone invasion, that may be followed by significant destruction of skull base structures and intracranial spread including cavernous sinus and middle cranial fossa. Like other tumors of this group, sinonasal adenocarcinoma originates from the mucosa of paranasal sinuses. Surgery combined with postoperative irradiation results better overall survival [48].

Lee Y. C. et al. analyzed 47 patients with advanced adenocystic carcinomas and reported a fairly good overall survival rate (61.7%) [49]. The best outcomes were obtained in patients who underwent surgical treatment with subsequent adjuvant radiotherapy. At the same time, the role of cisplatin-based chemotherapy is still not comprehensively defined in the treatment of this pathology.

Postoperative radiotherapy may be carried out using conventional photon irradiation or recently introduced proton therapy. The last one has shown favorable local growth control not only in postoperative period, but also in inoperable cases [50]. PET with glucose is advisable in these patients to predict the effectiveness of therapy with heavy particles [51].

Overall 5-year survival in patients with sinonasal adenocarcinomas is better (77.3%) compared with other craniofacial cancers although recurrence is observed in almost 65% of patients [48, 52].

Esthesioneuroblastoma

Olfactory neuroblastoma (esthesioneuroblastoma) is a rare malignancy originating from olfactory neuroepithelium and accounting for 3—5% of all nasal cancers [53–55]. There are currently no generally accepted treatment strategies for esthesioneuroblastoma due to small incidence of this tumor. The main approach is surgery with subsequent radiotherapy and with or without chemotherapy [56—58]. Comparable results of endoscopic procedures and craniofacial resection were shown like in other malignant sinonasal neoplasms affecting skull base [56].

According to various data, overall 5- and 10-year survival of patients with neuroblastomas is 85—93 and 57—75%, respectively, regardless of surgical approach [59—60]. Xiaolin Peng reported significantly higher overall survival of males compared with females [61].

Cervical lymph node metastases are observed in 5—12% of cases during initial examination. However, neck irradiation during the treatment of primary tumor should be considered due to higher incidence of metastases in the follow-up period (up to 39% within 40 months [62]) [63—64].

Conclusion

Patients with skull base neoplasms is fairly difficult group. Their treatment requires an integrated approach to determine the type of cancer, spread and stage. The choice of surgical approach and surgical procedure depend on tumor spread. Intraoperative monitoring should be obligatory technique during resection of skull base tumors because this approach improves surgical outcomes. It is especially important for advanced processes in the orbit and infratemporal fossa. Quality of resection is often limited by involvement of functionally important structures of the skull base. In general, treatment of unresectable forms of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck remains an open question. Comparative assessment of various results is extremely difficult since unresectability criteria are mostly subjective and depend on surgical professionalism and technical equipment of different hospitals. Available chemotherapeutic drugs with confirmed effectiveness do not ensure cure and prevention of metastases. Chemoradiotherapy is the most effective in comparison with radiotherapy alone. However, applicability of this method is limited by age, concomitant diseases and general somatic status of patients. Radiosensitizers are almost not used in combined treatment. To date, targeted drugs slightly improve treatment outcomes. However, high cost of this therapy makes it inaccessible for the vast majority of patients. Physical radiomodification measures are currently undeservedly forgotten, although these measures increase the effectiveness of treatment via decrease of tumor tolerance to the effects of cytotoxic agents. This effect allows you to reduce total irradiation dose and overall toxicity of the treatment, since reduced total dose is compensated or supplemented by the effect of radiosensitizers. Focal dose may be increased if radioprotectors are applied due to protection of normal tissues and higher limits of maximum permissible dose. Preserved functional activity of normal organs and tissues improves quality of life. It is also necessary to determine the role of human papillomavirus to carcinogenesis, prognostic value of detecting HPV, as well as the choice of chemotherapy mode considering this marker.

Authors’ participation:

Concept and design of the study — D.S.

Collection and analysis of data — D.S., I.Ch., I.M.

Writing the text — D.S., I.Ch., V.N.

Editing — D.S., V.Ch., K.P., O.A., G.K., E.V.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Commentary

Advanced head tumors were always difficult for oncologists and neurosurgeons due to small anatomical zone, close proximity of vital structures, difficult radical resection of tumors localized in central parts of the skull and large tissue defects followed by significant cosmetic and functional disorders.

The efforts of enthusiasts and pioneers in skull base surgery including prominent surgeons (H. Cushing, W. Dandy, P. Tessier, G. Yasargil, W. Fish, J. Raveh, etc.) resulted emergence of new surgical direction engaged in the development and implementation of complex combined interventions for skull base tumors (craniofacial surgery).

Skull base tumors is a group of neoplasms characterized by various histogenesis and lesion of the same anatomical zone. These tumors originate from the tissues around skull base.

Thus, effective organ-sparing approaches are required in these patients. The review is devoted to various treatment strategies in these patients depending on multiple factors including histological type, differentiation and spread of tumor, surgical approach and procedure, possibility of reconstructive stage, tumor sensitivity to chemoradiotherapy, therapeutic prognosis, prevention of intra- and postoperative complications.

Modern clinical experience allowing comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of various methods of diagnosis and treatment of patients with skull base tumors is described.

D.S. Svyatoslavov (Moscow, Russia)

References:

  1. Lund VJ, Stammberger H, Nicolai P, Castelnuovo P, Beal T, Beham A, Bernal-Sprekelsen M, Braun H, Cappabianca P, Carrau R, Cavallo L, Clarici G, Draf W, Esposito F, Fernandez-Miranda J, Fokkens W, Gardner P, Gellner V, Hellquist H, Hermann P, Hosemann W, Howard D, Jones N, Jorissen M, Kassam A, Kelly D, Kurschel-Lackner S, Leong S, McLaughlin N, Maroldi R, Minovi A, Mokry M, Onerci M, Ong YK, Prevedello D, Saleh H, Sehti DS, Simmen D, Snyderman C, Solares A, Spittle M, Stamm A, Tomazic P, Trimarchi M, Unger F, Wormald PJ, Zanation A; European Rhinologic Society Advisory Board on Endoscopic Techniques in the Management of Nose, Paranasal Sinus and Skull Base Tumours. European position paper on endoscopic management of tumours of the nose, paranasal sinuses and skull base. Rhinology. Supplement. 2010;22:1-143. Accessed November 17, 2019. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20502772http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20502772
  2. Spirin DS, Kobyakov GL, Cherekaev VA, Nazarov VV, Kadasheva AB, Vetlova ER, Gordon KV. Epidemiology, diagnosis, clinical symptoms, and classification of malignant primary skull base tumors. Voprosy neirokhirurgii imeni N.N. Burdenko. 2016;80(3):106-113. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17116/neiro2016803106-113
  3. Nicolai P, Schreiber A, Bolzoni Villaret A, Lombardi D, Morassi L, Raffetti E, Donato F, Battaglia P, Turri-Zanoni M, Bignami M, Castelnuovo P. Intestinal type adenocarcinoma of the ethmoid: Outcomes of a treatment regimen based on endoscopic surgery with or without radiotherapy. Head and Neck. 2016;38 Suppl 1:E996-E1003. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.24144
  4. Bentz BG, Bilsky MH, Shah JP, Kraus D. Anterior skull base surgery for malignant tumors: a multivariate analysis of 27 years of experience. Head and Neck. 2003;25(7):515-520. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.10250
  5. Clayman GL, DeMonte F, Jaffe DM, Schusterman MA, Weber RS, Miller MJ, Goepfert H. Outcome and complications of extended cranial-base resection requiring microvascular free-tissue transfer. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 1995;121(11):1253-1257. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1995.01890110031006
  6. Ducic Y, Miles BA, Sabatini P. Extending the traditional resection limits of squamous cell carcinoma of the anterior skull base. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2007;137(6):899-905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2007.09.005
  7. Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours 8th Edition. 2018. Accessed November 17, 2019. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7576471
  8. Ziai H, Yu E, Fu T, Muhanna N, Monteiro E, Vescan A, Zadeh G, Witterick IJ, Goldstein DP, Gentili F, de Almeida JR. Impact of Dural Resection on Sinonasal Malignancies with Skull Base Encroachment or Erosion. Journal of Neurological Surgery. Part B, Skull Base. 2018;79(5):419-426. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1612617
  9. Ganly I, Patel SG, Singh B, Kraus DH, Bridger PG, Cantu G, Cheesman A, De Sa G, Donald P, Fliss DM, Gullane P, Janecka I, Kamata SE, Kowalski LP, Levine PA, Medina Dos Santos LR, Pradhan S, Schramm V, Snyderman C, Wei WI, Shah JP. Craniofacial resection for malignant paranasal sinus tumors: Report of an International Collaborative Study. Head and Neck. 2005;27(7):575-584. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.20165
  10. Peck BW, Van Abel KM, Moore EJ, Price DL. Rates and Locations of Regional Metastases in Sinonasal Malignancies: The Mayo Clinic Experience. Journal of Neurological Surgery. Part B, Skull Base. 2018;79(3):282-288. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1607288
  11. Castelnuovo P, Battaglia P, Turri-Zanoni M, Tomei G, Locatelli D, Bignami M, Villaret AB, Nicolai P. Endoscopic endonasal surgery for malignancies of the anterior cranial base. World Neurosurgery. 2014;82(6 Suppl):S22-S31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2014.07.021
  12. Ragin CC, Taioli E. Survival of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in relation to human papillomavirus infection: review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Cancer. 2007;121(8):1813-1820. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22851
  13. Fakhry C, Westra WH, Li S, Cmelak, A, Ridge JA, Pinto H, Forastiere A, Gillison ML. Improved survival of patients with human papillomavirus-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in a prospective clinical trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2008;100(4):261-269. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djn011
  14. Bhattacharyya N. Factors predicting survival for cancer of the ethmoid sinus. American Journal of Rhinology. 2002;16(5):281-286. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12422974
  15. Cooper JS, Porter K, Mallin K, Hoffman HT, Weber RS, Ang KK, Gay EG, Langer CJ. National Cancer Database report on cancer of the head and neck: 10-year update. Head and Neck. 2009;31(6):748-758. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.21022
  16. Von Buchwald C, Bradley PJ. Risks of malignancy in inverted papilloma of the nose and paranasal sinuses. Current Opinion in Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery. 2007;15(2):95-98. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOO.0b013e3280803d9b
  17. De Almeida JR, Su SY, Koutourousiou M, Vaz Guimaraes Filho F, Fernandez Miranda J C, Wang EW, Gardner PA, Snyderman CH. Endonasal endoscopic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the sinonasal cavities and skull base: Oncologic outcomes based on treatment strategy and tumor etiology. Head and Neck. 2015;37(8):1163-1169. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23731
  18. Tanvetyanon T, Qin D, Padhya T, Kapoor R, McCaffrey J, Trotti A. Survival outcomes of squamous cell carcinoma arising from sinonasal inverted papilloma: report of 6 cases with systematic review and pooled analysis. American Journal of Otolaryngology. 2009;30(1):38-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2008.02.005
  19. Lee CH, Hur DG, Roh HJ, Rha KS, Jin HR, Rhee CS, Min YG. Survival rates of sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma with the new AJCC staging system. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2007;133(2):131-134. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.133.2.131
  20. Wellman BJ, Traynelis VC, McCulloch TM, Funk GF, Menezes AH, Hoffman HT. Midline anterior craniofacial approach for malignancy: results of en bloc versus piecemeal resections. Skull Base Surgery. 1999;9(1):41-46. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17171080
  21. Buchmann L, Larsen C, Pollack A, Tawfik O, Sykes K, Hoover LA. Endoscopic techniques in resection of anterior skull base/paranasal sinus malignancies. The Laryngoscope. 2006;116(10):1749-1754. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlg.0000233528.99562.c2
  22. McKay SP, Shibuya TY, Armstrong WB, Wong HS, Panossian AM, Ager J, Mathog RH. Cell carcinoma of the paranasal sinuses and skull base. American Journal of Otolaryngology. 2007;28(5):294-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2006.09.007
  23. Mine S, Saeki N, Horiguchi K, Hanazawa T, Okamoto Y. Craniofacial Resection for Sinonasal Malignant Tumors: Statistical Analysis of Surgical Outcome over 17 Years at a Single Institution. Skull Base. 2011;21(4):243-248. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1280686
  24. Patel SG, Singh B, Polluri A, Bridger PG, Cantu G, Cheesman AD, de Sa GM, Donald P, Fliss D, Gullane P, Janecka I, Kamata SE, Kowalski LP, Kraus DH, Levine PA, dos Santos LR, Pradhan S, Schramm V, Snyderman C, Wei WI, Shah JP. Craniofacial surgery for malignant skull base tumors: report of an international collaborative study. Cancer. 2003;98(6):1179-1187. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11630
  25. Luong A, Citardi MJ, Batra PS. Management of sinonasal malignant neoplasms: defining the role of endoscopy. American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy. 2010;24(2):150-155. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2010.24.3451
  26. Kim BJ, Kim DW, Kim SW, Han DH, Kim DY, Rhee CS, Lee CH. Endoscopic versus traditional craniofacial resection for patients with sinonasal tumors involving the anterior skull base. Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology. 2008;1(3):148-153. https://doi.org/10.3342/ceo.2008.1.3.148
  27. Nicolai P, Battaglia P, Bignami M, Bolzoni Villaret A, Delu G, Khrais T, Lombardi D, Castelnuovo P. Endoscopic surgery for malignant tumors of the sinonasal tract and adjacent skull base: a 10-year experience. American Journal of Rhinology. 2008;22(3):308-316. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajr.2008.22.3170
  28. Shipchandler TZ, Batra PS, Citardi MJ, Bolger WE, Lanza DC. Outcomes for endoscopic resection of sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma. The Laryngoscope. 2005;115(11):1983-1987. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlg.0000178330.09881.6b
  29. Hanna E, DeMonte F, Ibrahim S, Roberts D, Levine N, Kupferman M. Endoscopic resection of sinonasal cancers with and without craniotomy: oncologic results. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2009;135(12):1219-1224. https://doi.org/10.1001/archoto.2009.173
  30. Su SY, Kupferman ME, DeMonte F, Levine NB, Raza SM, Hanna EY. Endoscopic resection of sinonasal cancers. Current Oncology Reports. 2014;16(2):369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-013-0369-6
  31. Catalano PJ, Hecht CS, Biller HF, Lawson W, Post KD, Sachdev V, Sen C, Urken ML. Craniofacial resection. An analysis of 73 cases. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 1994;120(11):1203-1208. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7917203
  32. Specenier P, Vermorken JB. Targeted therapies in head and neck cancer. Target Oncology. 2007;2:73-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11523-007-0048-3
  33. Vermorken JB. Medical treatment in head and neck cancer. Annals of Oncology. 2005;16(Suppl 2):258-264. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdi735
  34. Cohen EE. Novel therapeutic targets in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Seminnars in Oncology. 2004;31:775-768. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.seminoncol.2004.09.010
  35. Sibilia MKR, Kroismayr R, Lichtenberger BM, Natarajan A, Hecking M, Holcmann M. The epidermal growth factor receptor: from development to tumorigenesis. Differentiation. 2007;75:770-787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1432-0436.2007.00238.x
  36. Ke LD, Adler-Storthz K, Clayman GL, Yung AW, Chen Z. Differential expression of epidermal growth factor receptor in human head and neck cancers. Head and Neck. 1998;20:320-327. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9588705
  37. Agarwal V, Subash A, Nayar RC, Rao V. Is EGFR really a therapeutic target in head and neck cancers? Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2019;119(6):685-686. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.25387
  38. Kirtane K, Rodriguez CP. Postoperative Combined Modality Treatment in High Risk Resected Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinomas of the Head and Neck (HNSCC). Frontiers in Oncology. 2018;8:588. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2018.00588
  39. Hanna EY, Cardenas AD, DeMonte F, Roberts D, Kupferman M, Weber R, Rosenthal D, Kies M. Induction chemotherapy for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the paranasal sinuses. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2011;137(1):78-81. https://doi.org/10.1001/archoto.2010.231
  40. Cantu G, Solero CL, Mariani L, Lo Vullo S, Riccio S, Colombo S, Pompilio M, Perrone F, Formillo P, Quattrone, P. Intestinal type adenocarcinoma of the ethmoid sinus in wood and leather workers: a retrospective study of 153 cases. Head and Neck. 2011;33(4):535-542. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.21485
  41. Antognoni P, Turri-Zanoni M, Gottardo S, Molteni M, Volpi L, Facco C, Freguia S, Mordacchini C, AlQahtani A, Bignami M, Capella C, Castelnuovo P. Endoscopic resection followed by adjuvant radiotherapy for sinonasal intestinal-type adenocarcinoma: Retrospective analysis of 30 consecutive patients. Head and Neck. 2015;37(5):677-684. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23660
  42. Bhayani MK, Yilmaz T, Sweeney A, Calzada G, Roberts DB, Levine NB, DeMonte F, Hanna EY, Kupferman ME. Sinonasal adenocarcinoma: a 16-year experience at a single institution. Head and Neck. 2014;36(10):1490-1496. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23485
  43. Licitra L, Suardi S, Bossi P, Locati LD, Mariani L, Quattrone P, Lo Vullo S, Oggionni M, Olmi P, Cantu G, Pierotti MA, Pilotti S. Prediction of TP53 status for primary cisplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin chemotherapy in ethmoid sinus intestinal-type adenocarcinoma. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2004;22(24):4901-4906. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.05.071
  44. Su SY, Bell D, Hanna EY. Esthesioneuroblastoma, neuroendocrine carcinoma, and sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma: differentiation in diagnosis and treatment. International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology. 2014;18(Suppl 2):S149-S156. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1390014
  45. Bell D, Hanna EY. Sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma: morphological heterogeneity, diagnosis, management and biological markers. Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy. 2013;13(3):285-296. https://doi.org/10.1586/era.13.1
  46. Mourad WF, Hauerstock D, Shourbaji RA, Hu KS, Culliney B, Li Z, Jacobson A, Tran T, Manolidis S, Schantz S, Urken M, Persky M, Harrison LB. Trimodality management of sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma and review of the literature. American Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2013;36(6):584-588. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0b013e31825eb3a5
  47. Al-Mamgani A, van Rooij P, Mehilal R, Tans L, Levendag PC. Combined-modality treatment improved outcome in sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma: single-institutional experience of 21 patients and review of the literature. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2013;270(1):293-299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-012-2008-5
  48. Lupinetti AD, Roberts DB, Williams MD, Kupferman ME. Rosenthal DI. Demonte F, El-Naggar A. Weber RS. Hanna EY. Sinonasal adenoid cystic carcinoma: the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Cancer. 2007;110(12):2726-2731. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23096
  49. Lee YC, Lee TJ, Tsang NM, Huang Y, Hsu CL, Hsin LJ, Lee YH, Chang KP. Cavernous sinus involvement is not a risk factor for the primary tumor site treatment outcome of Sinonasal adenoid cystic carcinoma. Journal of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2018;47(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40463-018-0257-z
  50. Takagi M, Demizu Y, Hashimoto N, Mima M, Terashima K, Fujii O, Jin D, Niwa Y, Morimoto K, Akagi T, Daimon T, Sasaki R, Hishikawa Y, Abe M, Murakami M, Fuwa N. Treatment outcomes of particle radiotherapy using protons or carbon ions as a single-modality therapy for adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2014;113(3):364-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2014.11.031
  51. Toubaru S, Yoshikawa K, Ohashi S, Tanimoto K, Hasegawa A, Kawaguchi K, Saga T, Kamada T. Accuracy of methionine-PET in predicting the efficacy of heavy-particle therapy on primary adenoid cystic carcinomas of the head and neck. Radiation Oncology. 2013;8:143. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-143
  52. Lloyd S, Yu JB, Wilson LD, Decker RH. Determinants and patterns of survival in adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck, including an analysis of adjuvant radiation therapy. American Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2011;34(1):76-81. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0b013e3181d26d45
  53. Castelnuovo P, Bignami M, Delu G, Battaglia P, Bignardi M, Dallan I. Endonasal endoscopic resection and radiotherapy in olfactory neuroblastoma: our experience. Head and Neck. 2007;29(9):845-850. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.20610
  54. Rimmer J, Lund VJ, Beale T, Wei WI, Howard D. Olfactory neuroblastoma: a 35-year experience and suggested follow-up protocol. The Laryngoscope. 2014;124(7):1542-1549. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24562
  55. Svane-Knudsen V, Jorgensen KE, Hansen O, Lindgren A, Marker P. Cancer of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses: a series of 115 patients. Rhinology. 1998;36(1):12-14.
  56. Devaiah AK, Andreoli MT. Treatment of esthesioneuroblastoma: a 16-year meta-analysis of 361 patients. The Laryngoscope. 2009;119(7):1412-1416. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20280
  57. Eich HT, Staar S, Micke O, Eich PD, Stutzer H, Muller R. Radiotherapy of esthesioneuroblastoma. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2001;49(1):155-160. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11163509
  58. Diaz EM Jr, Johnigan RH, 3rd, Pero C, El-Naggar AK, Roberts DB, Barker JL, DeMonte F. Olfactory neuroblastoma: the 22-year experience at one comprehensive cancer center. Head and Neck. 2005;27(2):138-149. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.20127
  59. Banuchi VE, Dooley L, Lee NY, Pfister DG, McBride S, Riaz N, Bilsky MH, Ganly I, Shah JP, Kraus DH, Morris LG. Patterns of regional and distant metastasis in esthesioneuroblastoma. The Laryngoscope. 2016;126(7):1556-1561. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.25862
  60. Kim N, Lee CG, Kim EH, Kim CH, Keum KC, Lee KS, Chang JH, Suh CO. Patterns of failures after surgical resection in olfactory neuroblastoma. Journal of Neuro-Oncology. 2019;141(2):459-466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-018-03056-0
  61. Peng X, Liu Y, Peng X, Wang Z, Zhang Z, Qiu Y, Jin M, Wang R, Kong D. Clinical features and the molecular biomarkers of olfactory neuroblastoma. Pathology, Research and Practice. 2018;214(8):1123-1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prp.2018.06.002
  62. Saito A, Sasaki T, Inoue T, Narisawa A, Inoue T, Suzuki S, Ezura M, Uenohara H. Non-contiguous Meningeal Recurrence of Olfactory Neuroblastoma: A Case Report and Literature Review. NMC Case Report Journal. 2018;5(3):69-72. https://doi.org/10.2176/nmccrj.cr.2017-0233
  63. Castelnuovo P, Turri-Zanoni M, Battaglia P, Antognoni P, Bossi P, Locatelli D. Sinonasal Malignancies of Anterior Skull Base: Histology-driven Treatment Strategies. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America. 2016;49(1):183-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2015.09.012
  64. Dulguerov P, Allal AS, Calcaterra TC. Esthesioneuroblastoma: a meta-analysis and review. The Lancet. Oncology. 2001;2(11):683-690. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(01)00558-7

Email Confirmation

An email was sent to test@gmail.com with a confirmation link. Follow the link from the letter to complete the registration on the site.

Email Confirmation

We use cооkies to improve the performance of the site. By staying on our site, you agree to the terms of use of cооkies. To view our Privacy and Cookie Policy, please. click here.