BACKGROUND: Extracapsular spread (ECS) in the cervical lymph nodes represents the most significant adverse prognostic indicator in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). METHODS: In a consecutive cohort of OSCC treated by primary surgery, ECS was seen in 25% (101) of 400 patients. RESULTS: ECS doubled the incidence of local recurrence and distant metastases, but tripled regional failure. The recurrences occurred sooner in ECS than in non-ECS cases (206 vs 334 days, p = .04). Patients with macroscopic ECS had a 5-year overall survival (OS) of 19% compared with 31% in microscopic ECS. MRI neck staging offered poor sensitivity, especially in microscopic ECS. Age >75 years, smoking, and heavy use of alcohol were independent predictors of ECS, which may implicate a failure of immunosurveillance by the host as much as adverse biology of the tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of ECS is essential in accurate prognostication, and we advocate that all patients with OSCC and ECS should be grouped as pN3 on the basis of their prognosis. (c) 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2010. (c) 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2010.
BACKGROUND: Extracapsular spread (ECS) in the cervical lymph nodes represents the most significant adverse prognostic indicator in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). METHODS: In a consecutive cohort of OSCC treated by primary surgery, ECS was seen in 25% (101) of 400 patients. RESULTS: ECS doubled the incidence of local recurrence and distant metastases, but tripled regional failure. The recurrences occurred sooner in ECS than in non-ECS cases (206 vs 334 days, p = .04). Patients with macroscopic ECS had a 5-year overall survival (OS) of 19% compared with 31% in microscopic ECS. MRI neck staging offered poor sensitivity, especially in microscopic ECS. Age >75 years, smoking, and heavy use of alcohol were independent predictors of ECS, which may implicate a failure of immunosurveillance by the host as much as adverse biology of the tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of ECS is essential in accurate prognostication, and we advocate that all patients with OSCC and ECS should be grouped as pN3 on the basis of their prognosis. (c) 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2010. (c) 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2010.
Authors: Julia A Woolgar; Asterios Triantafyllou; James S Lewis; Jennifer Hunt; Michelle D Williams; Robert P Takes; Lester D R Thompson; Pieter J Slootweg; Kenneth O Devaney; Alfio Ferlito Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2012-09-15 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Volkert B Wreesmann; Nora Katabi; Frank L Palmer; Pablo H Montero; Jocelyn C Migliacci; Mithat Gönen; Diane Carlson; Ian Ganly; Jatin P Shah; Ronald Ghossein; Snehal G Patel Journal: Head Neck Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: A H Aiken; S Poliashenko; J J Beitler; A Y Chen; K L Baugnon; A S Corey; K R Magliocca; P A Hudgins Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 3.825