| Literature DB >> 32680501 |
Xue-Xiao Bai1, Jie Zhang2, Li Wei3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe some of the characteristics of the inhabitants of Beijing with oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) who had received treatment at the Stomatology Hospital of Peking University and to analyze the survival rate and the prognostic factors of patients following surgical treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Beijing; Oral squamous cell carcinoma; Prognostic factor; Survival rate
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32680501 PMCID: PMC7367409 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01192-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Descriptive characteristics of OSCC
| Variable | Category | N | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 317 | 52.6 |
| Female | 286 | 47.4 | |
| Age | ≤ 40 | 14 | 2.3 |
| > 40 | 589 | 97.7 | |
| District | Urban | 460 | 76.3 |
| Suburban | 143 | 23.7 | |
| Tumor site | Tongue | 207 | 34.3 |
| Gingiva | 151 | 25.0 | |
| Cheek | 83 | 13.8 | |
| Mouth floor | 54 | 9.0 | |
| Oropharynx | 51 | 8.5 | |
| Lip | 38 | 6.3 | |
| Palate | 19 | 3.2 | |
| T stage | T1–2 | 397 | 65.8 |
| T3–4 | 206 | 34.2 | |
| Nodal metastasis | N0 | 394 | 65.3 |
| N+ | 209 | 34.7 | |
| pTNM stage | I | 150 | 24.9 |
| II | 137 | 22.7 | |
| III | 116 | 19.2 | |
| IV | 200 | 33.2 | |
| Tumor differentiation | I | 210 | 46.3 |
| II | 175 | 38.5 | |
| III | 22 | 4.8 | |
| Unknown | 47 | 10.4 | |
| Male | Tobacco | 61 | 19.2 |
| Alcohol | 9 | 2.8 | |
| Both | 137 | 43.2 | |
| None | 110 | 34.7 | |
| Female | Tobacco | 13 | 4.5 |
| Alcohol | 2 | 0.7 | |
| Both | 3 | 1.0 | |
| None | 268 | 93.7 |
Fig. 1Survival curve of OSCC patients from 2004 to 2012
Univariate survival analysis of OSCC with surgery a
| Variable | HR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||
| Male ( | 1.147 | (0.846, 1.557) | 0.377 |
| Female ( | 1 | ||
| Age | |||
| > 50 ( | 0.780 | (0.516, 1.178) | 0.238 |
| ≤ 50 ( | 1 | ||
| Place | |||
| Suburban ( | 1.262 | (0.898, 1.774) | 0.180 |
| Urban ( | 1 | ||
| Tumor site | |||
| Oropharynx ( | 1.103 | (0.648, 1.875) | 0.718 |
| Oral cavity, lip ( | 1 | ||
| pTNM stage | |||
| III–IV ( | 2.458 | (1.774, 3.406) | < 0.001 |
| I–II ( | 1 | ||
| T stage | |||
| T3–4 ( | 1.896 | (1.393, 2.581) | < 0.001 |
| T1–2 ( | 1 | ||
| Nodal metastasis | |||
| N+ ( | 2.426 | (1.786, 3.295) | < 0.001 |
| N0 ( | 1 | ||
| Tumor differentiation | |||
| II–III ( | 1.840 | (1.319, 2.565) | < 0.001 |
| I ( | 1 | ||
| Cigarettes | |||
| Yes ( | 0.901 | (0.652, 1.246) | 0.528 |
| No ( | 1 | ||
| Alcohol | |||
| Yes ( | 0.892 | (0.625, 1.274) | 0.529 |
| No ( | 1 | ||
| Neck dissection | |||
| Yes ( | 1.309 | (0.911, 1.882) | 0.146 |
| No ( | 1 | ||
| Postoperative radiotherapy | |||
| Yes ( | 1.858 | (1.360, 2.538) | < 0.001 |
| No ( | 1 | ||
aUnivariate Cox proportional hazards logistic regression
Fig. 2Survival curves of male and female OSCC patients
Fig. 3Survival curves of T1–2 and T3–4 OSCC patients
Fig. 4Survival curves of OSCC patients with and without nodal metastasis
Multivariate survival analysis for OSCC with surgerya
| Variable | HR | 95%CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| T3–4 | 1.822 | (1.308, 2.538) | < 0.001 |
| Nodal metastasis (+) | 2.348 | (1.685, 3.271) | < 0.001 |
| Female | – | – | 0.076 |
aMultivariate Cox proportional hazards logistic regression