Triple Positive Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients Predict Poor Survival Outcomes: Multiple Factor Positivity Warrants the Need for Modified Treatment Approaches.

Objectives: The presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion (PNI) and extranodal extension (ENE) have shown adverse outcomes in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). This study evaluated the impact of LVI, PNI and ENE, individually and in combination, on survival outcomes in OSCC. Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained oral cancer database was done from January 2017 to March 2023. All consecutive OSCC patients who underwent curative intent surgery were included. The triple-positive group was defined by the presence of all three features (LVI/PNI/ENE), while the double-positive group had the presence of two features. The disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) analysis was done between different study groups. Results: A total of 255 patients were included in the analysis. The LVI, PNI and ENE positivity was 13%, 26% and 11%, respectively. There were 19 patients (7%) with double-positive and ten patients (4%) with triple-positive disease. The triple-positive group had lower DFS than non-triple-positive (0% vs 57%, p-value 0.001) and lower OS (0% vs 72%, p-value 0.003). The median DFS and OS of the triple-positive group were eight months and 24 months, respectively. Similarly, the double-positive group also had statistically significant inferior DFS (p-value 0.007) and OS (p-value 0.002) compared to the single-positive/triple-negative group. Conclusion: The triple-positive disease had poor outcomes, with no patients achieving disease-free or overall survival at the 5-year follow-up. The presence of multiple adverse factors necessitates modification of adjuvant therapy and therapeutic strategy, which may enhance survival outcomes.

Margin to Depth of Invasion Ratio: A Significant Predictor of Survival in Patients With Oral Cancer.

PURPOSE: A common definition of a clear margin (≥5 mm) in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) for all stages is a subject of controversy. Studies have shown that even 1- and 2-mm margins are adequate, and few studies have identified dynamic resection margin as a criterion. We aimed to study the margin to depth of invasion ratio (MDR), margin to tumor thickness ratio (MTR), and margin to tumor size ratio (MSR) as prognostic markers for survival. Notably, to our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the role of MDR in OSCC. METHODS: A prospectively maintained head and neck cancer database was analyzed from January 2017 to February 2023. The MDR, MTR, and MSR were calculated for each patient. Survival outcomes were analyzed using the Cox proportional model and the Kaplan-Meier method. Akaike's information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) were used to compare different ratio models. X-tiles software was used to identify the optimal cutoff value of MDR. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty patients in the database were assessed, of which 123 eligible patients were enrolled in the study. MDR was an independent predictor of disease-free survival (DFS) on multivariate analysis. The MDR model had the lowest values on AIC and BIC analyses. A cutoff value of 0.5 for MDR showed a significant correlation with DFS and overall survival. CONCLUSION: MDR was the best predictor of recurrence of all the three ratios studied. The minimum safe surgical margin can be calculated by multiplying the depth of invasion by 0.5. This study signifies the role of dynamic resection margin criteria on the basis of MDR in defining clear margins.

Impact of the initial phase of COVID-19 pandemic on surgical oncology services at a tertiary care center in Eastern India.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global health emergency and affected the resources in both the public and private health sectors significantly. The present study aims to assess the impact of the pandemic on the services by the department in the first 3 months since the first COVID case in the region. METHODS: The study period was from 16 March to 15 June 2020. We queried the database for data on site of the tumor, diagnosis, stage, tumor board decisions and planning, surgical procedures, adjuvant treatment, and follow-up details. The change in tumor board decision and actual treatment taken by the patient were all recorded, taking into consideration the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Among the 1567 patient contacts, 1306 were out-patient visits and 261 teleconsultations. Fifty-four patients underwent surgery from the 87 admitted to the hospital. Ten preoperative patients and two postoperative patients were tested for COVID and reported to be negative. CONCLUSIONS: The dilemma of providing cancer surgery services to the patients in this pandemic has been global. Strict measures and guidelines can help to overcome the COVID pandemic time, keeping in mind the locoregional logistics.