|
|
|
|
LEADER |
03506nam a2200625Ia 4500 |
001 |
10.1007-s00784-017-2247-3 |
008 |
220706s2018 CNT 000 0 und d |
020 |
|
|
|a 14326981 (ISSN)
|
245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Lymph node density as a prognostic predictor in patients with betel nut-related oral squamous cell carcinoma
|
260 |
|
0 |
|b Springer Verlag
|c 2018
|
856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2247-3
|
520 |
3 |
|
|a Objectives: Lymph node metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is a poor prognostic factor. The histopathologic stage (e.g., pN) is used to evaluate the severity of lymph node metastasis; however, the current staging system insufficiently predicts survival and recurrence. We investigated clinical outcomes and lymph node density (LND) in betel nut-chewing individuals. Material and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 389 betel nut-exposed patients with primary OSCC who underwent surgical resection in 2002–2015. The prognostic significance of LND was evaluated by overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Kaplan-Meier analyses showed that the 5-year OS and DFS rates in all patients were 60.9 and 48.9%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that variables independently prognostic for OS were aged population (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.6, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.1–2.5; P = .025), and cell differentiation classification (HR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.4–4.2; P = .002). In pathologic N-positive patients, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for OS was used and indicated the best cutoff of 0.05, and the multivariate analysis showed that LND was an independent predictor of OS (HR = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.3–3.7; P = .004). Conclusions: Lymph node density, at a cutoff of 0.05, was an independent predictor of OS and DFS. OS and DFS underwent multiple analyses, and LND remained significant. The pathologic N stage had no influence in the OS analysis. Clinical relevance: LND is a more reliable predictor of survival in betel nut-chewing patients for further post operation adjuvant treatment, such as reoperation or adjuvant radiotherapy. © 2017, The Author(s).
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a adult
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Adult
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a aged
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Aged
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Aged, 80 and over
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Areca
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Betel nut
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a cancer staging
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Carcinoma, Squamous Cell
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a chemically induced
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a disease exacerbation
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Disease Progression
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a female
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Female
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a human
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Humans
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Lymph node density
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a lymph node metastasis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Lymphatic Metastasis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a male
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Male
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a middle aged
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Middle Aged
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Mouth Neoplasms
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a mouth tumor
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Neoplasm Staging
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Oral squamous cell carcinoma
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a pathology
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a prognosis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Prognosis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Prognostic factor
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Retrospective Studies
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a retrospective study
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a squamous cell carcinoma
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a survival rate
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Survival Rate
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a very elderly
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Chang, W.-C.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Chen, Y.-W.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Lin, C.-K.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Lin, C.-S.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Yang, C.-Y.
|e author
|
773 |
|
|
|t Clinical Oral Investigations
|