| Literature DB >> 33123565 |
B S M S Siriwardena1,2, H D N U Karunathilaka2, P V R Kumarasiri3, W M Tilakaratne1,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nodal metastasis is a critical factor in predicting the prognosis of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). When patients present with a clinically positive neck, the treatment of choice is radical neck dissection. However, management of a clinically negative neck is still a subject of significant controversy. AIM: This study was carried out in order to propose a model to predict regional lymph node metastasis of OSCC using histological parameters such as tumour stage, tumour size, pattern of invasion (POI), differentiation of tumour, and host immune response, together with the expression levels of six biomarkers (periostin, HIF-1α, MMP-9, β-catenin, VEGF-C, and EGFR), and, furthermore, to compare the impact of all these parameters on recurrence and 3 yr and 5 yr survival rates. Materials and Method. Histological materials collected from the archives were used to evaluate histological parameters and immunohistochemical profiles. Standard methods were used for immunohistochemistry and for evaluation of results. Data related to recurrence and survival (3 and 5 years) was also recorded. Clinical data was collected from patients' records.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33123565 PMCID: PMC7584939 DOI: 10.1155/2020/2059240
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
List of antibodies used.
| Antibody | Species/clonality | Dilution | Incubation time | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-EGFR antibody clone DAK-H1-WT code M7298 | Monoclonal mouse antihuman wild-type EGFR | 1 : 200 | 1 hr at R.T | Dako |
| Anti- | Monoclonal mouse antihuman | 1 : 50 | 1 hr at R.T | Dako |
| Antiperiostin ab14041 | Rabbit polyclonal to periostin | 1 : 450 | Overnight at 4°C | Abcam |
| Anti-HIF-1 | Mouse monoclonal [1A3] to HIF-1 | 1 : 400 | 1 hr at R.T | Abcam |
| Anti-VEGFC ab135506 | Rabbit polyclonal to VEGFC | 1 : 100 | 1 hr at R.T | Abcam |
| Anti-MMP-9 [EP1255Y] | Rabbit monoclonal [EP1255Y] to MMP-9 | 1 : 300 | 2 hrs at R.T | Abcam |
Evaluation of immunohistochemistry.
| Molecular marker | Referenced evaluation | Description | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EGFR | Hiraishi et al. [ | Extent score (ES) | Intensity score(IS) |
| 0: negative staining | 1: weak staining | |||
| 1: <10% | 2: moderate | |||
| 2: 10%-30% | 3: strong | |||
| 3: 30%-50% | TES+IS = total expression score (TES) | |||
| 4: 50%-80% | ||||
| 5: >80% | ||||
| TES: 1-4 > positive expression, 5-7 > high expression | ||||
| 2 |
| Modified Balasundaram et al. [ | Proportion score (PS) | Intensity score (IS) |
| 0: negative staining | 1: weak staining | |||
| 1: <10% | 2: moderate | |||
| 2: 10%-50% | 3: strong | |||
| 3: 50%-80% | PS × IS = TES | |||
| 4: >80% | ||||
| TES: 0 > no expression, 1-12 > positive expression | ||||
| 3 | HIF-1 | Modified Santos et al. [ | Proportion score (PS) | Intensity score (IS) |
| 0: negative staining | 1: weak staining | |||
| 1: <10% | 2: moderate | |||
| 2: 10%-50% | 3: strong | |||
| 3: 50%-80% | PS × IS = TES | |||
| TES: 1-7 > positive expression, 8-12 > high expression | ||||
| 4 | Periostin | Modified Kudo et al. [ | Proportion score (PS) | Intensity score (IS) |
| 0: negative staining | 1: weak staining | |||
| 1: <10% | 2: moderate | |||
| 2: 10%-50% | 3: strong | |||
| 3: 50%-80% | PS × IS = TES | |||
| 4: >80% | ||||
| TES: 0-4 > low expression, 5-12 > high expression | ||||
| 5 | VEGF-C | Naruse et al. [ | Proportion score (PS) | Intensity score (IS) |
| 0: negative staining | 1: weak staining | |||
| 1: <10% | 2: moderate | |||
| 2: 10%-50% | 3: strong | |||
| 3: 50%-80% | PS × IS = TES | |||
| 4: >80% | ||||
| TES: 0-4 > low expression, 5-12 > high expression | ||||
| 6 | MMP-9 | Modified Sauter et al. [ | Proportion score (PS) | Intensity score (IS) |
| 0: negative staining | 1: weak staining | |||
| 1: <10% | 2: moderate | |||
| 2: 10%-50% | 3: strong | |||
| 3: 50%-80% | PS × IS = TES | |||
| 4: >80% | ||||
| TES: 0-4 > low expression, 5-7 > moderate expression, and 8-12 > high expression | ||||
Summary data of the univariate analysis with regard to metastasis.
| Variable | Metastasis | Total (%) |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive (%) | Negative (%) | ||||
| Age | 31–39 yrs | 5 (4.7) | 6 (3.3) | 11 (3.8) | 0.73 |
| 40–49 yrs | 17 (16.0) | 30 (16.3) | 47 (16.2) | ||
| 50–59 yrs | 40 (37.7) | 61(33.2) | 101 (34.8) | ||
| 60–69 yrs | 34 (32.1) | 58 (31.5) | 92 (31.7) | ||
| ≥70 yrs | 10 (9.4) | 29 (15.7) | 39 (13.4) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| Gender | Female | 28(26.4) | 44 (23.9) | 72 (24.8) | 0.635 |
| Male | 78 (73.6) | 140 (76.1) | 218 (75.2) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| Primary site | Buccal mucosa | 40 (37.7) | 90 (48.9) | 130 (44.8) | 0.285 |
| Tongue | 30 (28.3) | 43 (23.4) | 73 (25.2) | ||
| lower alveolar ridge | 12 (11.3) | 14 (7.6) | 26 (9.0) | ||
| Floor of mouth | 7 (6.6) | 16 (8.7) | 23 (7.9) | ||
| Other | 17 (16.0) | 21 (11.4) | 38 (13.1) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| Tumour stage | 1 and 2 | 18 (27.3) | 64 (50.0) | 82 (42.3) | 0.002∗ |
| 3 and 4 | 48 (72.7) | 64 (50.0) | 112 (57.7) | ||
| Total | 66 (100.0) | 128 (100.0) | 194 (100.0) | ||
| Tumour size | T1, T2 | 27 (48.2) | 56 (75.7) | 83 (63.8) | 0.001∗ |
| T3, T4 | 29 (51.8) | 18 (24.3) | 47 (36.2) | ||
| Total | 56 (100.0) | 74 (100.0) | 130 (100.0) | ||
| Host response | Dense | 15 (14.2) | 50 (27.2) | 65 (22.4) | 0.01∗ |
| Light | 91 (85.8) | 134 (72.8) | 225 (77.6) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| Differentiation | Well | 31 (29.2) | 115 (62.5) | 146 (50.3) | <0.001∗ |
| Poor | 75 (70.8) | 69 (37.5) | 144 (49.7) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| Pattern of invasion | POI II | 12 (11.3) | 66 (35.9) | 78 (26.9) | <0.001∗ |
| POI III | 37 (34.9) | 59 (32.1) | 96 (33.1) | ||
| POI IV | 57 (53.8) | 59 (32.1) | 116 (40.0) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| EGFR expression | Strongly positive | 93 (87.7) | 134 (72.8) | 227 (78.3) | 0.003∗ |
| Weakly positive | 13(12.3) | 50 (27.2) | 63 (21.7) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
|
| No | 77 (72.6) | 129 (70.1) | 206 (71.0) | 0.647 |
| Yes | 29 (27.4) | 55 (29.9) | 84 (29.0) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| HIF-1 | Positive | 24 (22.6) | 48 (26.1) | 72 (24.8) | 0.513 |
| High | 82 (77.4) | 136 (73.9) | 218 (75.2) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| Periostin | Low | 38 (35.8) | 65 (35.3) | 103 (35.5) | 0.929 |
| High | 68 (64.2) | 119 (64.7) | 187 (64.5) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| VEGF-C | Low | 69 (65.1) | 114 (62.0) | 183 (63.1) | 0.594 |
| High | 37 (34.9) | 70 (38.0) | 107 (36.9) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
| MMP-9 | Low | 61 (57.5) | 112 (60.9) | 173 (59.7) | 0.579 |
| High | 45 (42.5) | 72 (39.1) | 117 (40.3) | ||
| Total | 106 (100.0) | 184 (100.0) | 290 (100.0) | ||
∗Statistically significant.
Figure 1Expression of EGFR in the present study sample. (a) Negative staining of EGFR in normal epithelium. (b) Weak staining of EGFR in OSCC. (c) Moderate staining of EGFR in OSCC. (d) Strong staining of EGFR in OSCC.
Logistic regression model.
| Variables |
| SE |
| Odds ratio (CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tumour differentiation | 1.304 | 0.51 | 0.10 | 3.68 (1.36-9.93) |
| Inversion pattern | ||||
| POI II (ref) | 1 | |||
| POI III | 1.086 | 0.59 | 0.06 | 2.96 (0.93-9.41) |
| POI IV | 1.760 | 0.70 | 0.12 | 5.81 (1.46-23.09) |
| Constant | -3.158 | 0.88 | <0.00 |