Elsevier

Oral Oncology

Volume 45, Issue 1, January 2009, Pages 10-15
Oral Oncology

The impact of lymphovascular invasion on survival in oral carcinoma

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.03.009Get rights and content

Summary

Data was retrospectively analysed on 72 consecutive patients treated primarily with resection and concomitant neck dissection for intraoral carcinomas. Twenty prognostic variables were assessed by univariate analysis to assess their influence on survival. Seven variables were significant at the 5% level. Survival was negatively influenced by six tumour related factors, increasing T stage (P = 0.039), increasing N stage (P = 0.004), greater than two nodes histologically positive nodal disease (P = 0.017), tumour size >4 cm (P = 0.022), residual disease at the primary site (P = 0.012), extracapsular nodal spread (P = 0.01) and the one treatment related factor analysed, adjuvant radiotherapy (P = 0.039). Subsequent multivariate analysis was performed via the cox stepwise regression method to assess the influence on survival of all factors which achieved significance at the 20% level. There were only two variables which made a significant difference (P < 0.05) to the multivariate model. The presence of lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.015) and histological evidence of mandibular invasion (P = 0.047). Lymphovascular invasion appeared in the final model despite not achieving statistical significance at the 5% level on univariate analysis. A final cox survival model was constructed. The relative risk of death for those with cervical metastases (N2 and above) at diagnosis was 3.74 (P = 0.005). The addition of lymphovascular invasion to the cox model revealed an increase in the relative risk of death in the presence of lymphovascular invasion of 2.99 (P = 0.015). Patients with nodal negative disease and one single node positive provided the baseline risk as there was no significant difference between these two groups. The presence of histological evidence of lymphovascular invasion in oral carcinoma surgical specimens has a significant impact on survival outcome in oral carcinoma patients.

Introduction

In the search for prognostic factors in oral carcinoma many variables have been identified and can broadly be placed in the categories of tumour related, patient related and treatment related factors.1

Prognosis in oral cancer is largely determined by tumour related factors. The tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) system of cancer classification recognises this fact.2 However, this staging system does not incorporate histopathological factors at a time when they are increasingly recognised as being significant to prognosis.

The study aim was to relate histopathological features of primary oral carcinomas and neck dissection specimens to survival in oral carcinoma.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

The management principle of the two units from which the data for this study were sourced is identical. All operable patients with primary intraoral carcinomas are treated with surgery and concomitant neck dissection. Adjuvant radiotherapy is prescribed on pathological analysis of the surgical specimens, if there is evidence of close margins at the primary site (<5 mm), greater than one node positive, extracapsular spread or bulky metastatic disease in the neck dissection specimens.

Seventy-two

Statistical methods

The Cox regression method was used to investigate the effect of several variables at any given time. A forward stepwise Cox regression was performed for analysis of multiple variables which may have a prognostic impact on survival in this cohort of patients. Initial screening for prognostic variables was done by univariate analysis. Variables shown on univariate analysis to be prognostically statistically significant were entered into a multivariate analysis by the Cox proportional hazards

Outcome

There were ten local recurrences during the observation period, (14%) of whole group. Of the ten local recurrences, six were in the floor of mouth, two in the buccal mucosa, one in the left lateral tongue region and one in the hard palate Local recurrence occurred between a range of 68 and 1925 days (Mean 517 days). Consequently, 79% of all local recurrences presented clinically within 24 months of primary surgical treatment. There were 14 nodal recurrences (19%) of whole group. Nodal

Discussion

The natural history of tumours and the three key events which characterise malignancy are reflected in the TNM system.3 These are T is the ability to grow and locally invade, N is the ability to metastasize to regional draining lymphatics, and M is the ability to metastasize to distant sites.2

In relation to oral cavity tumours these three criteria are independent indicators of prognosis although they are intimately inter-related. Increasing size by T stage leads to an increase in the rate of

Conflict of Interest Statement

None declared.

References (30)

  • R.B. Bell et al.

    Tongue cancer: Is there a difference in survival compared with other subsites in the oral cavity?

    J Oral Maxillofac Surg

    (2007)
  • A. Chandu et al.

    Factors affecting survival in patients with oral cancer: an Australian perspective

    Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg

    (2005)
  • F. Janot et al.

    Prognostic value of clinicopathological parameters in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective analysis

    Brit J Cancer

    (1996)
  • C. Wittekind
  • R. Lindberg

    Distribution of cervical lymph node metastases from squamous cell carcinoma of the upper respiratory and digestive tracts

    Cancer

    (1972)
  • Cited by (77)

    • Prognostic value of lymphovascular and perineural invasion in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue

      2022, Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology
    • Impact of lymphovascular invasion in oral squamous cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis

      2021, Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology
    • The utility of postoperative radiotherapy in intermediate-risk oral squamous cell carcinoma

      2021, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text