| Literature DB >> 32616049 |
Eiichi Ishida1, Takenori Ogawa2,3,4, Masahiro Rokugo5,6, Tomohiko Ishikawa5,6,7, Shun Wakamori5,6, Akira Ohkoshi5,6, Hajime Usubuchi7, Kenjiro Higashi5, Ryo Ishii5, Ayako Nakanome5,6, Yukio Katori5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adenoid cystic carcinoma is a rare malignant tumor arising from exocrine glands such as the major and minor salivary glands of the paranasal sinuses or the external auditory canal. Although multiple retrospective clinical studies of ACC have been reported to date, clinical questions, such as 1) long-term prognosis beyond 20 years, 2) usefulness and suitability for treatment of therapeutic interventions, 3) therapeutic goal to aim for, and 4) prognosis by recurrence sites, are still unclear.Entities:
Keywords: Adenoid cystic carcinoma; Head and neck; Histology; Lung metastasectomy; Management; Prognostic predictors; Salvage treatment; Solid type; Surgery; Treatment
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32616049 PMCID: PMC7330995 DOI: 10.1186/s13005-020-00226-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Head Face Med ISSN: 1746-160X Impact factor: 2.151
Patient characteristics (n = 58)
| Variable | The number of patients |
|---|---|
| Median observation period (range) | 66.8 months (3–316) |
| Median age (range) | 61.5 years old (12–87) |
| Woman | 32 (55.1%) |
| Primary site | |
| Major salivary gland | 21 (36.2%) |
| Parotid gland | 7 (12.1%) |
| Submandibular gland | 8 (13.8%) |
| Sublingual gland | 6 (10.3%) |
| Sinonasal cavity | 14 (24.1%) |
| Maxillary sinus | 11 (19.0%) |
| Ethmoid sinus | 1 (1.7%) |
| Sphenoid sinus | 1 (1.7%) |
| Nasal septum | 1 (1.7%) |
| Pharynx | 7 (12.1%) |
| Nasopharynx | 1 (1.7%) |
| Oropharynx | 6 (10.3%) |
| Oral cavity | 4 (6.9%) |
| Palate | 2 (3.5%) |
| Tongue | 2 (3.5%) |
| External ear canal | 6 (10.3%) |
| Lacrimal gland/Orbit | 2 (3.5%) |
| Larynx | 1 (1.7%) |
| Trachea | 2 (3.5%) |
| Parapharyngeal space | 1 (1.7%) |
| T classification | |
| T1 | 4 (6.9%) |
| T2 | 16 (27.6%) |
| T3 | 13 (22.4%) |
| T4 | 25 (43.1%) |
| N classification | |
| N0 | 51 (87.9%) |
| N1 | 2 (3.4%) |
| N2a | 5 (8.6%) |
| N3 | 0 (0%) |
| M classification | |
| M0 | 52 (89.7%) |
| M1 | 6 (10.3%) |
| Overall clinical stage | |
| I | 4 (6.9%) |
| II | 15 (25.9%) |
| III | 11 (19.0%) |
| IV | 28 (48.2%) |
| Initial treatment | |
| Surgery alone | 18 (32.1%) |
| Surgery + adjuvant therapy | 25 (43.1%) |
| Particle-beam radiation | 6 (10.3%) |
| Chemoradiation | 1 (1.7%) |
| Palliation | 8 (13.7%) |
| Surgical-margin status | |
| Positive (0 mm) or close to margin (< 5 mm) | 28 (48.2%) |
| Negative (≥5 mm) | 10 (17.2%) |
| No surgery or unknown | 20 (34.5%) |
| Histologic pattern | |
| Cribriform and/or tubular | 36 (62.0%) |
| Solid | 16 (27.5%) |
| unknown | 6 (10.3%) |
| Perineural invasion | |
| (−) | 8 (13.8%) |
| (+) | 24 (41.4%) |
| unknown | 26 (44.8%) |
aAll N2 cases were N2b
Fig. 1Overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and disease-free survival (DFS) of all ACC cases. Kaplan-Meier method was adopted for creating each survival curve
Fig. 2Survival curves of disease-specific survival (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Kaplan-Meier method for creating each survival curve and Log-rank test for significance test between groups were adopted, respectively
Prognostic factors of disease-specific survival. Multivariate analyses with variables of clinical stage, presence or absence of surgery, and histological type were performed. Conducting surgery and cribriform and/or tubular type of histology were independent prognostic factors, reducing 81 and 68% of risk of disease specific death, respectively, while early clinical stage was not independent prognostic factor. Log-rank test for univariate analysis and Cox proportional hazard model for multivariate analysis were adopted
| Variable | Univariate-analysis | Multivariate analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio (95%CI) | |||
| Clinical stage | 0.002** | 0.239 (0.028–2.477) | 0.191 |
| Surgery | < 0.001*** | 0.189 (0.059–0.607) | 0.005** |
| Histology | < 0.001*** | 0.316 (0.108–0.930) | 0.036* |
*** represents significance at p < 0.001, ** at p < 0.01, and * at p < 0.05 level
Fig. 3Correlations between solid type of histology and clinical stage. Solid type was observed in only advanced staged cases. The more clinical stage advanced, the higher percentage of solid type became
Correlations between solid type of histology and clinical stage. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was adopted for analyzing correlation between histology and clinical stage
| Variable1 | Variable2 | Correlation coefficient | p value | Significance level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical stage (I,II/ III,IV) | Histology (C-T/Solid) | 0.354 | 0.010* | 1% |
| T classification (T1,2/T3,4) | Histology (C-T/Solid) | 0.376 | 0.006** | 1% |
| N classification (N0/N1,2) | Histology (C-T/Solid) | 0.421 | 0.002** | 1% |
| M classification (M0/M1) | Histology (C-T/Solid) | 0.281 | 0.044* | 5% |
** represents significance at p < 0.01, and * at p < 0.05 level
Fig. 4Disease-specific survival (DSS) after salvage treatment for locoregional recurrence were shown in (a), and for lung metastatic recurrence were shown in (b). Kaplan-Meier method for creating each survival curve and Log-rank test for significance test between groups were adopted, respectively. Significance level of 0.05 was used for comparison of all groups, and the Bonferroni correction was adopted to determine the proper significance levels in multiple pairwise comparisons. * represents significant p value. Abbreviations: DSS; disease-specific survival, Tx; therapy, BSC; best supportive care