| Literature DB >> 22918395 |
C Pena Murillo1, X Huang, A Hills, M McGurk, A Lyons, J-P Jeannon, E Odell, A Brown, K Lavery, W Barrett, M Sherriff, R Brakenhoff, M Partridge.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Locoregional recurrence is the major cause of treatment failure after surgery for oral squamous cell carcinoma. Molecular diagnostics have the potential to improve on clinicopathological parameters to predict this recurrence and plan adjuvant treatment. The test most frequently applied is based on detecting TP53 mutations, but alternative methodology is required for cases that harbour the wild-type gene.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22918395 PMCID: PMC3461148 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.213
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Clinicopathological details for 102 cases analysed with respect to tumour TP53 gene status
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age mean (range) | 62 (34–90) | 63 (36–82) | |
|
| |||
| Male | 32 | 32 | 64 |
| Female | 19 | 19 | 38 |
|
| |||
| I or II | 11 | 14 | 25 |
| III or IV | 40 | 37 | 87 |
|
| |||
| T1 or T2 | 11 | 14 | 25 |
| T3 or T4 | 14 | 35 | 49 |
|
| |||
| N0 | 21 | 21 | 42 |
| N1 | 10 | 10 | 20 |
| N2 | 19 | 17 | 36 |
| N3 | 1 | 1 | |
|
| |||
| 2 | 46 | 39 | 85 |
| 3 | 34 | 35 | 69 |
| 5 | 22 | 20 | 42 |
|
| |||
| Well | 16 | 16 | 32 |
| Moderate | 27 | 27 | 54 |
| Poor | 8 | 8 | 16 |
| Vascular invasion | 11 | 9 | 20 |
| Neural invasion | 18 | 10 | 28 |
|
| |||
| Pushing | 16 | 19 | 35 |
| Infiltrative | 35 | 32 | 67 |
| Dysplasia at resection margin | 19 | 14 | 33 |
| Dysplasia at molecular margin | 8 | 5 | 13 |
|
| |||
| Yes | 26 | 20 | 46 |
| No | 25 | 31 | 56 |
|
| |||
| Local | 9 | 7 | 16 |
| Regional only | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| Local and regional | 10 | 11 | 21 |
| Alive at study end | 20 | 29 | 49 |
| DOC | 5 | 3 | 8 |
| DOD | 24 | 19 | 43 |
| Lost to follow-up | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Abbreviations: DOC=died as a result of other causes; DOD=died of disease.
Figure 1Kaplan–Meier estimates for (A) The TP53-based diagnostic, no locoregional recurrence with respect to the presence or absence of TP53 mutations in the tumour-adjacent margins examined. (B) No locoregional recurrence with the dual TP53- and Ly-6D-based diagnostic. (C) No locoregional recurrence with the dual diagnostic for cases wherein the tumour-adjacent margins examined were from cases in which the clearance at the resection margins was 5 mm or less. (D) No local recurrence with the dual diagnostic with respect to clear tumour-adjacent margins, TP53 mutation-positive tumour-adjacent mucosal margins, positive deep margins or positivity at both sites.
The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for the TP53 LigAmp and Ly-6D QRT-PCR assays for locoregional recurrence
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| TA margins | 22 | 12 | Positive predictive value 64.7% (95% CI, 46.5–80.3%) |
| TA margins | 2 | 15 | Negative predictive value 88.2% (95% CI, 63.6–98.5%) |
| Sensitivity 91.7% | Specificity 55.6% | ||
| TA margins | 8 | 6 | Positive predictive value 57.1% (95% CI, 28.9–82.3%) |
| TA margins | 11 | 26 | Negative predictive value 70.3% (95% CI, 53–84.1%) |
| Sensitivity 42.2% | Specificity 81.3% | ||
| TA margins positive with the dual diagnostic | 30 | 18 | Positive predictive value 62.5% (95% CI, 47.4–76%) |
| TA margins negative with the dual diagnostic | 13 | 41 | Negative predictive value 75.9% (95% CI, 62.4–86.5%) |
| Sensitivity 69.8% | Specificity 69.5% |
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; QRT-PCR=quantitative reverse-transcription PCR; TA=tumour-adjacent.