What would be the best treatment for a sagging jowl for cancer survivor?

Without in person evaluation it is impossible to give you good advice. In general your facial asymmetry is caused due to scarring and soft tissue loss as a result of irradiation. It becomes more obvious in your current years because in process of normal aging we are loosing fat tissue from the face. In order to correct deformity one needs to bring new volume in that area by means of fat grafts. Fillers will not produce such a satisfactory result. It is also possible to use tissues underneath your scalp in form of vascularized flap to add soft tissue and additional vascularization to the area. A modified face lift should be a part of procedure. Consultation with a board certified plastic surgeon with experience in facial reconstruction would help.

I think that it would be in your better interests to see a plastic surgeon with an interest in facial aesthetics. After a full assessment all treatment modalities can be discussed with a view to achieving your goal.

Without at least. picture it is very difficult to give you any advice. In these cases, it is sometimes preferential to use non invasive modalities.

A combination approach will give the most improvement. I recommend fillers for the jowls themselves but also lifting around the mouth and cheeks to build underlying anatomical support. In our practice we combine sculptra with other fillers "layered" on top and lasers, rf treatments, J Plasma and peels to get the most conservative natural look. Please see a facial sculpting expert. Best, Dr. Emer

 Hi, in specific cases of facial cancer surgery followed by radiation therapy, the answer is less certain.  If your Parotid gland or a portion thereof was removed this makes the branches of the facial nerve more exposed to possible dissection during a facelift.  Facial shaping might be an option using an off the shelf dermal filler but not fat transfer or injection (reasoning follows below).  No smiling photos of your face from the front and side would help in the evaluation in addition front full face smiling to assess any facial nerve weakness that currently exists. I have performed many facelifts for over 30 years and have performed many minimally, invasive SMAS facelifts.  If you have "jowls” these are sagging facial tissues and the main indication for some form of a SMAS facelift.  The underlying SMAS layer, of the face, must be dissected, lifted, trimmed and re-sutured (not merely folded or suspended with threads or sutures that will not last).  The excess skin is then removed and the facelift incisions closed.
 My most popular SMAS facelift is the minimally invasive, short incision SMAS facelift that has all the benefits of more invasive facelifts (traditional, mid-face, deep plane, cheek lift and subperiosteal facelifts) but with these added benefits:
very small incisions and no incisions extend or are placed within the hair.
minimal tissue dissection = less bruising and swelling = rapid recovery ( several days instead of weeks or months with the more invasive type facelifts mentioned)
can be performed in 90 minutes or less, with or without general anesthesia
no incisions within the hair = no hair loss
excess fat can be removed from the face and neck
excess skin removed from the face and neck
cheeks, chin and jaw line can be augmented with dermal fillers (I prefer Restylane Lyft) or facial implants
most patients fly back home to parts all over the world in as little as 3 days post-op
I combine facial shaping with every facelift procedure.  When jowls are present, these should be done in concert and not alone or separately in order to create a naturally, more attractive face. Following my beauty principles, women look the most feminine, youthful and attractive with heart shaped faces.  Heart shaped faces have cheeks that are full and round in the front.  Cheek augmentation with a dermal filler or using cheek implants for a permanent enhancement will create full, round cheeks that will feminize the entire face.
 A weak chin creates an imbalance making the nose appear larger, the mid face top heavy and the lower face look short that de-emphasizes the lips and allows early formation of a double chin.  Chin augmentation using a chin implant will add projection to the chin creating harmony and balance to the lower face.  I have found placement of a silastic chin implant, through a small curved incision under the chin (also allows excess skin removal) to be very safe, quick and highly effective.  Conversely, men look chiseled and handsome with angularity in the cheeks, chin and mandibular angles. I have performed many facial shaping procedures using dermal fillers, facial implants (cheek, chin), liposuction and/or facelifts for over 30 years.  In my experience and despite its recent increase in popularity, fat transfer (fat injection) offers "far" less of a reliable and predictable volume for facial shaping than an off the shelf dermal filler or silastic facial implant.  For that reason, I do not use fat to shape the cheeks, chin, lips or jaw line.  Tissue physiology is quite simple.  Tissue requires a blood supply in and out as well as lymphatic connections to remain viable and alive.  Once fat is removed from the body all of these things have been disrupted.  Just because the removed fat is mixed with PRP or something else doesn't make the blood and lymphatics magically re-appear.  The fat at that point is not living tissue which means that it's prone to being dissolved by the body (most likely in an uneven and unpredictable manner).  Injecting fat back into the face does not create the required elements to make the fat living tissue once again.  So the argument that fat is alive and viable in the face once it's been removed and re-injected makes no sense to me as a physician and surgeon.
 The other issue that I have with fat transfer is the lack of precision.  Fat is thick by nature which means it's not the same consistency as an off the shelf dermal filler.  Fat injections use an increased volume injected in an attempt to compensate for the volume loss that "will" happen.  This means a lack of specific shape and volume that simply can not begin to compare with the specificity of using a silastic facial implant of a "known" shape and volume.  In that regard fat offers too much of an unknown to make it a reliable and predictable method for facial shaping.  There's a significant difference between a 3mm and 5mm thick cheek implant.  You can imagine the magnitude of difference there is between retaining 60% of 25cc's of fat versus 35%.  In my humble opinion, I just don’t see how fat could possibly be used to precisely shape facial features?
Hope this helps.