BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma tumors positive for laboratory biomarkers hrHPV and p16 and negative for EGFR often respond better to nonsurgical organ-preservation therapy than hrHPV-negative, p16-negative, and EGFR overexpressing tumors. CTP has been shown to distinguish which locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas will respond to induction chemotherapy or chemoradiation. Our purpose was to determine whether a relationship exists between CTP measures and the expression of these laboratory biomarkers, because both appear to separate head and neck squamous cell carcinoma tumors into similar groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective review of head and neck CTP in 25 patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who had signed informed consent. Eight women and 17 men, 41-80 years of age, constituted a pretreatment group of 18 patients and a palliative group of 7 patients. Tumor biopsy samples were analyzed for overexpression of hrHPV, p16, and EGFR. The hrHPV, p16, and EGFR status of the tumors was correlated with CTP parameters (MTT, BV, BF, CP) by using the Wilcoxon evaluation and Fischer exact test. RESULTS: There were significantly lower CP values in pretreatment tumors overexpressing EGFR (P = .04). CP values ≤17.23 were significantly correlated with EGFR overexpression (P = .015). A trend toward higher CP values was present in hrHPV-positive and p16-overexpressing pretreatment tumors (P = .14). CONCLUSIONS: A significant correlation exists between CTP measures and EGFR overexpression in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas, suggesting an association between certain imaging findings and molecular biomarkers. These results may be related to a tumor cell survival mechanism linking perfusion and biomarker expression.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma tumors positive for laboratory biomarkers hrHPV and p16 and negative for EGFR often respond better to nonsurgical organ-preservation therapy than hrHPV-negative, p16-negative, and EGFR overexpressing tumors. CTP has been shown to distinguish which locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas will respond to induction chemotherapy or chemoradiation. Our purpose was to determine whether a relationship exists between CTP measures and the expression of these laboratory biomarkers, because both appear to separate head and neck squamous cell carcinoma tumors into similar groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective review of head and neck CTP in 25 patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who had signed informed consent. Eight women and 17 men, 41-80 years of age, constituted a pretreatment group of 18 patients and a palliative group of 7 patients. Tumor biopsy samples were analyzed for overexpression of hrHPV, p16, and EGFR. The hrHPV, p16, and EGFR status of the tumors was correlated with CTP parameters (MTT, BV, BF, CP) by using the Wilcoxon evaluation and Fischer exact test. RESULTS: There were significantly lower CP values in pretreatment tumors overexpressing EGFR (P = .04). CP values ≤17.23 were significantly correlated with EGFR overexpression (P = .015). A trend toward higher CP values was present in hrHPV-positive and p16-overexpressing pretreatment tumors (P = .14). CONCLUSIONS: A significant correlation exists between CTP measures and EGFR overexpression in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas, suggesting an association between certain imaging findings and molecular biomarkers. These results may be related to a tumor cell survival mechanism linking perfusion and biomarker expression.
Authors: Jimin Fei; Angela Hong; Timothy A Dobbins; Deanna Jones; C Soon Lee; Christine Loo; Mohammad Al-Ghamdi; Gerald B Harnett; Jonathan Clark; Christopher J O'Brien; Barbara Rose Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-07-15 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Gypsyamber D'Souza; Aimee R Kreimer; Raphael Viscidi; Michael Pawlita; Carole Fakhry; Wayne M Koch; William H Westra; Maura L Gillison Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-05-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bhavna Kumar; Kitrina G Cordell; Julia S Lee; Francis P Worden; Mark E Prince; Huong H Tran; Gregory T Wolf; Susan G Urba; Douglas B Chepeha; Theodoros N Teknos; Avraham Eisbruch; Christina I Tsien; Jeremy M G Taylor; Nisha J D'Silva; Kun Yang; David M Kurnit; Joshua A Bauer; Carol R Bradford; Thomas E Carey Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-05-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: S Y Jo; P I Wang; J E Nör; E L Bellile; Z Zhang; F P Worden; A Srinivasan; S K Mukherji Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Evangelia Katsoulakis; Yao Yu; Aditya P Apte; Jonathan E Leeman; Nora Katabi; Luc Morris; Joseph O Deasy; Timothy A Chan; Nancy Y Lee; Nadeem Riaz; Vaios Hatzoglou; Jung Hun Oh Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2020-06-30 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Carsten Pietsch; Felipe de Galiza Barbosa; Martin W Hüllner; Daniel T Schmid; Stephan K Haerle; Gerhard F Huber; Gabriela Studer; Thomas F Hany; Patrick Veit-Haibach Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2015-12-29 Impact factor: 1.930
Authors: Robin W Jansen; Paul van Amstel; Roland M Martens; Irsan E Kooi; Pieter Wesseling; Adrianus J de Langen; Catharina W Menke-Van der Houven van Oordt; Bernard H E Jansen; Annette C Moll; Josephine C Dorsman; Jonas A Castelijns; Pim de Graaf; Marcus C de Jong Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2018-04-13