Piyush Gupta1, Jocelyn C Migliacci2, Pablo H Montero3, Daniella Karassawa Zanoni4, Jatin P Shah5, Snehal G Patel6, Ian Ganly7. 1. Department of Surgery, Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: guptap1@mskcc.org. 2. Department of Surgery, Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: migliacj@mskcc.org. 3. Department of Surgery, Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: pmontero@clc.cl. 4. Department of Surgery, Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: karassad@mskcc.org. 5. Department of Surgery, Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: shahj@mskcc.org. 6. Department of Surgery, Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: patels@mskcc.org. 7. Department of Surgery, Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: ganlyi@mskcc.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the need for a separate staging system for gingivobuccal complex squamous cell cancers (GBCSCC) based on 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) data from one institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved retrospective analysis was performed on an oral cavity cancer patient database. Patients from 1985 to 2012 with primary surgical treatment for biopsy-proven squamous cell cancer (SCC) from either the oral tongue (TSCC Group) or gingivobuccal complex (GBCSCC Group), were selected as two separate subgroups. The clinicopathologic data were used to stage the patients based on the American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition. Survival outcomes including 5-year OS, RFS, and DSS were calculated and analyzed. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify if subsite was an independent predictor for the survival outcomes, adjusting for other variables. A p-value of less than .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: 936 patients with TSCC and 486 patients with GBCSCC were considered eligible for the analysis. Patients with GBCSCC were more likely to be older (p < .001) and presented with more advanced disease (p < .001) compared to patients with TSCC. Unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) suggested GBCSCC had poor OS compared to TSCC. However, after adjusting for other variables, the adjusted HR was not significant (p = .593). There was no difference in 5-year DSS or RFS in either of the study groups. CONCLUSION: With similar survival outcomes by stage, there is no justification for using a different staging system for GBCSCC.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the need for a separate staging system for gingivobuccal complex squamous cell cancers (GBCSCC) based on 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) data from one institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved retrospective analysis was performed on an oral cavity cancerpatient database. Patients from 1985 to 2012 with primary surgical treatment for biopsy-proven squamous cell cancer (SCC) from either the oral tongue (TSCC Group) or gingivobuccal complex (GBCSCC Group), were selected as two separate subgroups. The clinicopathologic data were used to stage the patients based on the American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition. Survival outcomes including 5-year OS, RFS, and DSS were calculated and analyzed. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify if subsite was an independent predictor for the survival outcomes, adjusting for other variables. A p-value of less than .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: 936 patients with TSCC and 486 patients with GBCSCC were considered eligible for the analysis. Patients with GBCSCC were more likely to be older (p < .001) and presented with more advanced disease (p < .001) compared to patients with TSCC. Unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) suggested GBCSCC had poor OS compared to TSCC. However, after adjusting for other variables, the adjusted HR was not significant (p = .593). There was no difference in 5-year DSS or RFS in either of the study groups. CONCLUSION: With similar survival outcomes by stage, there is no justification for using a different staging system for GBCSCC.
Authors: W K Hong; S M Lippman; L M Itri; D D Karp; J S Lee; R M Byers; S P Schantz; A M Kramer; R Lotan; L J Peters Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1990-09-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: William M Lydiatt; Snehal G Patel; Brian O'Sullivan; Margaret S Brandwein; John A Ridge; Jocelyn C Migliacci; Ashley M Loomis; Jatin P Shah Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Daniella Karassawa Zanoni; Pablo H Montero; Jocelyn C Migliacci; Jatin P Shah; Richard J Wong; Ian Ganly; Snehal G Patel Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2019-02-15 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Heiko Schöder; Paula Demétrio De Souza França; Reiko Nakajima; Eva Burnazi; Sheryl Roberts; Christian Brand; Milan Grkovski; Audrey Mauguen; Mark P Dunphy; Ronald A Ghossein; Serge K Lyashchenko; Jason S Lewis; Joseph A O'Donoghue; Ian Ganly; Snehal G Patel; Nancy Y Lee; Thomas Reiner Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-04-03 Impact factor: 12.531