4.7 Article

Poor prognosis in patients with stage I and II oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma

Journal

CANCER
Volume 112, Issue 2, Pages 345-351

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23183

Keywords

oral tongue cancer; oral cavity cancer; head and neck cancer; prognosis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND The objective of this study was to compare survival in patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the oral tongue with that in patients with SCC in other oral cavity subsites. METHODS Patients with stage I and II (T1-T2N0M0) SCC of the oral cavity diagnosed between 1988 and 2004 were queried by using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The log-rank test was used to compare the overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS) of patients who had oral tongue SCC with those of patients who had SCC of other oral cavity subsites. A Cox proportional hazards multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of covariates on the risk of CSS and OS. RESULTS Between 1988 and 2004, 6791 patients with stage I and II SCC of the oral cavity were identified. Among them, 40% had oral tongue SCC, and 60% had SCC of other oral cavity subsites. The median patient age was 64 years. The 5-year OS and CSS rates were 60.9% and 83.5%, respectively, for patients with oral tongue SCC versus 64.7% and 94.1%, respectively, for patients with SCC of other oral cavity subsites (OS: hazard ratio, 1.24; P < .0001; CSS: hazard ratio, 3.04; P < .0001). On multivariate analysis, OS and CSS were influenced significantly by T classification, age, sex, and oral tongue subsite. The CSS for patients who had stage I and II oral tongue SCC also was unfavorable compared with the CSS for stage-matched patients who had SCC of other head and neck sites. CONCLUSIONS Oral tongue SCC was associated with poor survival compared with other oral cavity and head and neck sites. These data suggested a potential benefit for multimodality therapy in this cohort of patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available