| Literature DB >> 28095396 |
Elias Sundquist1,2, Joonas H Kauppila1,2,3, Johanna Veijola4,5, Rayan Mroueh6, Petri Lehenkari1,2, Saara Laitinen7, Juha Risteli2,8,9, Ylermi Soini10,11, Veli-Matti Kosma10,11,12, Iris Sawazaki-Calone13, Carolina Carneiro Soares Macedo14, Risto Bloigu15, Ricardo D Coletta14, Tuula Salo1,2,16.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC) metastasises early, especially to regional lymph nodes. There is an ongoing debate on which early stage (T1-T2N0) patients should be treated with elective neck dissection. We need prognosticators for early stage tongue cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28095396 PMCID: PMC5344290 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.455
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Figure 1Characterisation of the new matrix antibodies. Coomassie-stained SDS-7.5% PAGE of the target antigens from the cultured hMSC lysate immunoprecipitated using the new anti-tenascin-C monoclonal antibody D2 (A) or anti-fibronectin monoclonal antibody F12 (B). Molecular weight markers are shown on the left of the gels: Bio-Rad Dual Colour (A) and Sigma Colorburst (B). The identified target antigen is marked with arrows. Bands migrating at ∼60 kDa region are mouse antibody fragments detached from the resin (A). The immunostaining of the synovia tissue sections with anti-tenascin-C D2, anti-fibronectin F12 and idiotype IgG1 as negative control (C). New antibodies were compared with commercial ones by staining representative samples from ‘negative' and ‘abundant' groups using both D2 and commercial DB7 for TNC (D), and both F12 and commercial NCL-FIB for FN (E).
Patient data of stage I and II OTSCC patients
|
| |||||
| Male | 53 (54) | 24 (41) | 9 (64) | 6 (75) | 14 (82) |
| Female | 45 (46) | 35 (59) | 5 (36) | 2 (25) | 3 (18) |
|
| |||||
| ⩽55 | 26 (26) | 13 (22) | 3 (21) | 3 (38) | 7 (41) |
| 56–69 | 33 (34) | 15 (25) | 7 (50) | 4 (50) | 7 (41) |
| ⩾70 | 39 (40) | 31 (53) | 4 (29) | 1 (12) | 3 (18) |
| Range | 32–99 | 32–99 | 33–80 | 45–77 | 40–80 |
| Mean | 64.18 | 67.17 | 62.29 | 56.50 | 59 |
| Median | 64 | 70 | 63.5 | 57 | 59 |
|
| |||||
| Range | 1–298 | 1–298 | 3–175 | 6–127 | 1–139 |
| Mean | 73.65 | 80.75 | 72.71 | 61.38 | 55.59 |
| Median | 57 | 64 | 60 | 47.5 | 51 |
|
| |||||
| Alive | 49 (50) | 31 (53) | 6 (43) | 5 (62) | 7 (41) |
| Cancer | 22 (22) | 8 (14) | 3 (21) | 3 (38) | 8 (47) |
| Other | 27 (28) | 20 (33) | 5 (36) | – | 2 (12) |
|
| |||||
| 1 | 28 (28) | 24 (41) | 4 (29) | – | – |
| 2 | 37 (38) | 32 (54) | 5 (36) | – | – |
| 3 | 6 (6) | 3 (5) | 3 (21) | – | – |
| Missing | 27 (28) | – | 2 (14) | 8 (100) | 17 (100) |
|
| |||||
| Positive | 2 (2) | 2 (3) | – | – | – |
| Negative | 96 (98) | 57 (97) | 14 (100) | 8 (100) | 17 (100) |
|
| |||||
| No | 67 (69) | 47 (80) | 7 (50) | 3 (37) | 10 (59) |
| Radiotherapy | 22 (22) | 9 (15) | 7 (50) | 2 (26) | 4 (23) |
| Radio- and chemotherapy | 7 (7) | 1 (2) | – | 3 (37) | 3 (18) |
| Missing | 2 (2) | 2 (3) | – | – | – |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 39 (40) | 17 (29) | 8 (57) | 5 (62) | 9 (53) |
| No | 59 (60) | 42 (71) | 6 (43) | 3 (38) | 8 (47) |
Abbreviations: CEONC=Oncology Center of Cascavel; KUH=Kuopio University Hospital; OTSCC=oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma; OUH=Oulu University Hospital.
Data as combination from all the hospitals, as well as separately from each hospital.
Figure 2Scoring of stromal and intracellular TNC and FN.Stromal TNC (A–C) and FN (E–G) were scored from 0 to 4 and grade 0 was labelled ‘negative' (A and E), grades 1–3 were combined and labelled ‘moderate' (B and F) and grade 4 was labelled ‘abundant' (C and G). Intracellular TNC (D) and FN (H) were scored from 0 to 2. Grade 0 was labelled ‘negative' and 1–2 were combined and labelled ‘positive' (D and H).
Results of scoring of stromal and intracellular TNC, and FN of stage I and II OTSCC patients
|
| |||||
| Negative | 26 (27) | 20 (34) | – | 2 (25) | 4 (23) |
| Moderate | 65 (66) | 35 (59) | 11 (79) | 6 (75) | 13 (77) |
| Abundant | 7 (7) | 4 (7) | 3 (21) | – | – |
|
| |||||
| Negative | 60 (61) | 32 (54) | 12 (86) | 4 (50) | 12 (71) |
| Positive | 38 (39) | 27 (46) | 2 (14) | 4 (50) | 5 (29) |
|
| |||||
| Negative | 35 (36) | 27 (46) | 3 (21) | 1 (13) | 4 (24) |
| Moderate | 55 (56) | 28 (47) | 10 (72) | 6 (74) | 11 (64) |
| Abundant | 8 (8) | 4 (7) | 1 (7) | 1 (13) | 2 (12) |
|
| |||||
| Negative | 63 (64) | 47 (80) | 7 (50) | 4 (50) | 5 (29) |
| Positive | 35 (36) | 12 (20) | 7 (50) | 4 (50) | 12 (71) |
Abbreviations: CEONC=Oncology Center of Cascavel; FN=fibronectin; KUH=Kuopio University Hospital; OTSCC=oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma; OUH=Oulu University Hospital; TNC=tenascin-C.
Amounts of various scoring groups shown in total and for each individual hospital separately.
Figure 3Survival of stage I and II OTSCC patients.Kaplan–Meier curves representing the cumulative survival of early stage OTSCC patients divided by stromal TNC (A) and FN (B) staining, as well as cellular TNC (C) and FN (D). In curves A–D the survivals are shown throughout the entire follow-up time. Five-year survivals are shown separately (E). Log-rank test was used to test statistical significance.
Cox regression uni- and multivariate analyses of stage I and II OTSCC patients
|
| |||
| Negative | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 1.09 | 0.39–3.07 | NS |
| Abundant | |||
|
| NS | ||
| Negative | 1 | ||
| Positive | 1.03 | 0.43–2.48 | NS |
|
| |||
| Moderate | 1 | ||
| Abundant | |||
|
| NS | ||
| Negative | 1 | ||
| Positive | 2.30 | 0.99–5.33 | NS |
|
| |||
| Negative | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 0.76 | NS | |
| Abundant | |||
|
| NS | ||
| Negative | 1 | ||
| Positive | 1.61 | 0.54–4.78 | NS |
|
| |||
| Moderate | 1 | ||
| Abundant | |||
|
| NS | ||
| Negative | 1 | ||
| Positive | 1.56 | 0.61–4.04 | NS |
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; FN=fibronectin; HR=hazard ratio; OTSCC=Oncology Center of Cascavel; TNC=tenascin-C.
Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, gender and hospital.
HR and their 95% CI, as well as P-values. Analyses were performed separately for stromal and cellular TNC and FN. In multivariate analysis the HRs were adjusted for age, gender and hospital. The HR for stromal FN in multivariate analysis was calculated by comparing abundant to moderate due to the lack of end points (cancer deaths) in the FN-negative group. Statistically significant values are bolded.
HR could not be calculated comparing with ‘Negative' group due to lack of end points in that group.