| Literature DB >> 32691230 |
Jochen Hess1, Dominik Horn2, Karl Metzger3, Julius Moratin4, Kolja Freier2, Jürgen Hoffmann4, Karim Zaoui5, Michaela Plath5, Fabian Stögbauer6, Christian Freudlsperger4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Angiolymphatic invasion serves as a histopathological risk factor for unfavorable survival in head and neck squamous cell carinoma. The aim of the study was to explore the molecular mechanisms characterizing angiolymphatic invasion and therefore identify a gene expression signature related to angiolymphatic invasion.Entities:
Keywords: Angiolymphatic invasion; HNSCC; Head and neck cancer; Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; Laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32691230 PMCID: PMC8519817 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-020-06214-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 0937-4477 Impact factor: 2.503
Fig. 1a Overall survival of patients in the TCGA-HNSCC cohort according to angiolymphatic invasion status. b Progression-free survival of patients in the TCGA-HNSCC cohort according to angiolymphatic invasion status
Fig. 2a Overall survival of patients in the TCGA-HNSCC cohort according to gene expression signature. b Progression-free survival of patients in the TCGA-HNSCC cohort according to gene expression signature
Fig. 3a Overall survival of patients in the TCGA-LaSCC cohort according to gene expression signature. b Progression-free survival of patients in the TCGA-LaSCC cohort according to gene expression signature
Fig. 4a Overall survival of patients with confirmed negative histopathological ALI status in the TCGA-LaSCC cohort according to gene expression signature. b Progression-free survival of patients with confirmed negative histopathological ALI status in the TCGA-LaSCC cohort according to gene expression signature
Univariate and multivariate analysis of overall and progression-free survival of LaSCC (n = 111)
| Variable | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | CI | HR | CI | |||
| Tobacco yes vs. no | ||||||
| Alcohol | 0.8485 | 0.4516 | 0.61 | |||
| Cluster B vs. A | 3.168 | 1.403 | 0.00552 | 2.3603 | 0.94778 | 0.065073 |
| Age | 1.017 | 0.9794 | 0.376 | |||
| Gender f vs m | ||||||
| R1 vs R0 | ||||||
| Grade | 1.004 | 0.6897 | 0.983 | |||
| ALI + vs − | 2.279 | 1.031 | 0.0418 | |||
| ECS + vs − | 2.454 | 1.147 | 0.0207 | |||
| PNI + vs − | 3.78 | 1.568 | 0.00305 | |||
| Stage III/IV vs I/II | 0.7174 | 0.2476 | 0.541 | |||
| Tobacco yes vs. no | 0.5149 | 0.1823 | 0.21 | |||
| Alcohol yes vs. no | 0.8569 | 0.498 | 0.577 | |||
| Cluster B vs. A | ||||||
| Age | 0.9913 | 0.961 | 0.582 | |||
| Gender f vs m | 2.252 | 1.172 | 0.0148 | 2.107 | 0.9592 | 0.0634 |
| R1 vs R0 | ||||||
| Grade | 1.015 | 0.7184 | 0.931 | |||
| ALI | 2.063 | 0.9957 | 0.0514 | |||
| ECS + vs − | 2.397 | 1.141 | 0.021 | |||
| PNI + vs − | 3.118 | 1.446 | 0.00372 | |||
| Stage III/IV vs I/II | 1.016 | 0.3974 | 0.974 | |||
Variables identified as independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis are highlighted
HR hazard ratio, CI 95% confidence interval