MATERIALS AND METHODS: E-cadherin and Galectin-9 expression was examined by immunohistochemistry in 32 cases of OSCC of the buccal mucosa (13 with and 19 without lymph node metastasis), as well as 6 samples of reactive lesions and 5 of normal buccal mucosa.
RESULTS: The expression of E-cadherin in OSCC was significantly lower than the control tissues but galectin-9 expression was conversely higher. Median E-cadherin HSCOREs between OSCCs positive and negative for nodal metastasis were not significantly different. Mean HSCOREs for galectin-9 in OSCC without lymph node metastasis (127.7 ± 81.8) was higher than OSCC with lymph node metastasis (97.9 ± 62.9) but this difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: E-cadherin expression is reduced whilst galectin-9 expression is increased in OSCC. However, the present results suggest that E-cadherin and galectin-9 expression may not be useful as prognostic markers for OSCC.
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.
Results: Male to female ratio was 3 : 1. The commonest site of OSCC was the buccal mucosa, and majority of them were T3 or T4 tumours presented at stage 4. 62.5% of the tumours were well differentiated. Three-year and 5-year survival rates were significantly associated with lymph node metastasis and recurrence. POI was significantly correlated with tumour size, stage, 3-year survival, EGFR, HIF-1α, periostin, and MMP-9 (p < 0.05). Expression of EGFR showed a direct association with metastasis (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: POI, level of differentiation, and expression of EGFR are independent prognostic markers for lymph node metastasis. Therefore, these parameters may help in treatment planning of a clinically negative neck.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Total of 50 samples were selected for the study and were categorized into five groups and 10 samples in each group as Group I-oral leukoplakia (OL), Group II-oral lichen planus (OLP), Group III-oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF), Group IV-oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and Group V-normal oral mucosa (NOM) as control group. All the samples were assessed for the expression of E-cad by immunohistochemical study.
RESULTS: Upon assessing the expression of E-cad in OL, OSMF, OLP and OSCC, as majority of the samples with OSCC (90%), OL (80%), OLP (70%) and OSMF (60%) showed mild to moderate expression of E-cad staining, which was suggestive of reduction in dysplastic cells on comparison to NOM cells. This difference in expression and variation of E-cad upon comparison with normal mucosa was statistically significant (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: There is significant (P < 0.001) variation of expression of E-cad with the histopathological dysplasia of the oral precancerous lesions and conditions, and the tumor differentiation of the oral cancers. However, there was no correlation of the degree of loss of expression of E-cad with the degree of dysplasia or the tumor differentiation of oral cancers. We conclude with our study that, there is a variation in the expression of E-cad but its value as a prognostic marker is questionable.