Postoperative risk stratification in oral squamous cell carcinoma

Biomaterial-based strategies for maxillofacial tumour therapy and bone defect regeneration

Issues caused by maxillofacial tumours involve not only dealing with tumours but also repairing jaw bone defects. In traditional tumour therapy, the systemic toxicity of chemotherapeutic drugs, invasive surgical resection, intractable tumour recurrence, and metastasis are major threats to the patients' lives in the clinic. Fortunately, biomaterial-based intervention can improve the efficiency of tumour treatment and decrease the possibility of recurrence and metastasis, suggesting new promising antitumour therapies. In addition, maxillofacial bone tissue defects caused by tumours and their treatment can negatively affect the physiological and psychological health of patients, and investment in treatment can result in a multitude of burdens to society. Biomaterials are promising options because they have good biocompatibility and bioactive properties for stimulation of bone regeneration. More interestingly, an integrated material regimen that combines tumour therapy with bone repair is a promising treatment option. Herein, we summarized traditional and biomaterial-mediated maxillofacial tumour treatments and analysed biomaterials for bone defect repair. Furthermore, we proposed a promising and superior design of dual-functional biomaterials for simultaneous tumour therapy and bone regeneration to provide a new strategy for managing maxillofacial tumours and improve the quality of life of patients in the future.

Perineural and lymphovascular invasion in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue

BACKGROUND

Perineural invasion (PNI) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) may be adverse prognostic indicators in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the tongue.

METHODS

The percentages of histological PNI and LVI were determined in 335 patients with tongue SCC. Sixty tumours originally reported as negative for these features were tested to determine how many more were positive with "immunohistochemical enhancement."

RESULTS

PNI was found in 141 (42.1%) and LVI in 51 (15.2%) patients. 79.4% of the 141 patients who had PNI and 72.6% of the 51 with LVI had a T3 or T4 tumour. Lymph node metastasis was identified in 145 (51.2%) of the 280 patients who had undergone neck dissection; 58.2% of the 141 patients with PNI and 80.4% of the 51 patients with LVI had lymph node metastasis. There was a highly statistically significant correlation between PNI with increasing pT (P < .00001) and pN (P < .0001) stage, and a statistically significant correlation between LVI and pT stage (P < .001), the association of LVI with pN status could not be reliably tested statistically. Immunohistochemistry for S100 identified five further cases of PNI, but review of the original H&E showed the feature was present in four and had been missed at original reporting. CD31 identified three further possible cases of LVI and D2-40 none. The endothelium of some vascular channels was positive for both CD31 and D2-40 and cross-reactivity with other cells compromised interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

Histological identification of PNI and LVI per se remains of uncertain prognostic significance. "Immunohistochemical enhancement" offered little benefit.