Integrating Quality of Life Metrics into Head and Neck Cancer Treatment Planning: Evidence and Implications

Background/Objectives: Head and neck cancers significantly affect patients’ functional and psychosocial well-being. Multidisciplinary tumor boards have a central role in optimizing treatment strategies, but the relationship between tumor characteristics, comorbidities, and quality of life (QoL) remains insufficiently explored. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 94 patients with head and neck cancers evaluated by the oncology committee of Coltea Clinical Hospital in 2024. QoL was assessed post-surgery using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and H&N35 questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, correlations, and multivariate regression analyses were performed to examine associations between clinical variables and QoL outcomes. Results: The cohort comprised 82 men (87.2%) and 12 women (12.8%), with a mean age of 61.5 ± 9.8 years. The most common tumor site was the larynx (43.6%). Global QoL was low (mean = 42.3, SD = 11.7), and fatigue scores were high (mean = 61.5, SD = 13.5). All EORTC domains showed non-normal distributions (Shapiro–Wilk, p < 0.05). Kruskal–Wallis analysis revealed significantly lower QoL scores in patients with metastatic adenopathy with aunknown primary (p = 0.03). Spearman’s correlation indicated a moderate negative association between Charlson Comorbidity Index and QoL (r = −0.38, p = 0.01). Multivariate regression confirmed comorbidities (β = −2.5, p = 0.02) and tumor type (metastatic adenopathy, β = −8.0, p = 0.04) as independent predictors of reduced QoL. Conclusions: Patients with advanced disease and higher comorbidity burden experience significantly poorer QoL after head and neck cancer surgery. Tumor board decisions facilitate individualized treatment planning; however, systematic integration of QoL metrics is essential to optimize both oncological and functional outcomes.