METHODS: Retrospective review of a 310 PMD patient cohort presenting to Maxillofacial Surgery in Newcastle upon Tyne with new, single-site lesions between December 2009 and May 2014. Patients underwent Orcellex® brush biopsy and liquid-based cytology examination in addition to conventional biopsy techniques, with management proceeding along established care pathways. Patient demographics, cytology data, most significant histopathology diagnoses and clinical outcome were all documented at the study census date (31.12.15).
RESULTS: A total of 170 male & 140 female patients (age range 18-91 years), exhibiting primarily leukoplakia (86.5%) at floor of mouth and ventrolateral tongue sites (44.9%), were identified. Management comprised: observation (49.7%), laser surgery (44.9%), antifungal treatment (3.5%) and Head & Neck clinic referral following cancer diagnosis (1.9%). Clinical outcomes were as follows: disease free (51.3%), persistent PMD (42.3%) and malignant transformation (6.4%). Histology and cytology diagnoses strongly correlated (r = .305). Treatment modality, lesion site, histology and cytology diagnoses were the best predictors of clinical outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Orcellex® brush cytology provides reliable diagnoses consistent with conventional histopathology and offers less invasive, adjunctive assessment appropriate for long-term monitoring of patients in specialist clinics.
METHODS: Detailed, retrospective clinico-pathological analysis of potentially malignant lesions undergoing malignant transformation, from a 590 patient cohort treated by interventional laser surgery and followed for a mean of 7.3 years, was undertaken. Clinical outcome was documented at study census date (31 December 2014).
RESULTS: A total of 99 patients (16.8%) developed cancer: 71 (12%) seen "unexpectedly" upon excision and 28 (4.8%) progressing to malignancy at a median of 87.3 months post-surgery. Thirty "unexpected" excisions were micro-invasive (42.3%) arising primarily in severely dysplastic precursors (75%) at ventro-lateral tongue and floor of mouth sites (54.5%); 1 patient (1.4%) had a cancer-related death, whilst 58 (81.7%) were disease free. A total of 19 of 28 "progressive" cancers (67.9%) arose at new sites, with erythroleukoplakia a significant predictor of malignancy (P = .0019). Nine (32.1%) developed at the same precursor site, with 6 (77.7%) on the ventro-lateral tongue and floor of mouth. Three (10.7%) were micro-invasive, 9 patients (32.1%) died from metastatic disease and 12 (42.9%) were disease free (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: Squamous carcinoma may arise at the site of a precursor lesion as transformation or new-site development via field cancerisation. Whilst interventional surgery facilitates early diagnosis and treatment of occult disease, thus reducing risk from same-site transformation, new-site cancer is a significant long-term risk for patients with potentially malignant disorder.
METHODS: A detailed, retrospective clinico-pathological review of treatment resistant potentially malignant lesions, from a 590 patient cohort treated by CO2 laser surgery and followed for a mean of 7.3 years, was undertaken. Clinical outcome was determined at study census date (31 December 2014).
RESULTS: A total of 87 patients (15%) exhibited PMD disease resistant to treatment: 34 (6%) became disease free following further treatment, whilst 53 (9%) had persistent disease despite intervention. Disease-free patients were younger, changed lesion appearance from erythroleukoplakia to leukoplakia (P = .004), developed further lesions at new sites, demonstrated reduction in dysplasia severity with time and required multiple treatments to achieve disease-free status (P = .0005). In contrast, persistent disease patients were older, male, often presented with proliferative verrucous leukoplakia (PVL) on gingival and alveolar sites, displayed less severe dysplasia initially and underwent laser ablation rather than excision (P = .027).
CONCLUSION: Despite clinico-pathological profiling of treatment resistant patients, the precise inter-relationship between the inherent nature of potentially malignant disease and the external influence of treatment intervention remains obscure.
METHODS: Total RNA was extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue biopsies of 20 OPMD cases with known clinical outcomes (10 MT vs. 10 NT). Samples were assessed for quantity, quality and integrity of RNA prior to sequencing. Analysis for differential gene expression between MT and NT was performed using statistical packages in R. Genes were considered to be significantly differentially expressed if the False Discovery Rate corrected P-value was 1.90). Analysis of RNA-Sequencing outputs revealed 41 genes (34 protein-coding; 7 non-coding) that were significantly differentially expressed between MT and NT cases. The log2 fold change for the statistically significant differentially expressed genes ranged from -2.63 to 2.48, with 23 protein-coding genes being downregulated and 11 protein-coding genes being upregulated in MT cases compared to NT cases.
CONCLUSION: Several candidate genes that may play a role in malignant transformation of OPMD have been identified. Experiments to validate these candidates are underway. It is anticipated that this work will contribute to better understanding of the etiopathogenesis of OPMD and development of novel biomarkers.
METHODS: Patients with oral epithelial dysplasia at one hospital were selected as the 'training set' (n = 56) whilst those at another hospital were selected for the 'test set' (n = 66). RNA was extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) diagnostic biopsies and analysed using the NanoString nCounter platform. A targeted panel of 42 genes selected on their association with oral carcinogenesis was used to develop a prognostic gene signature. Following data normalisation, uni- and multivariable analysis, as well as prognostic modelling, were employed to develop and validate the gene signature.
RESULTS: A prognostic classifier composed of 11 genes was developed using the training set. The multivariable prognostic model was used to predict patient risk scores in the test set. The prognostic gene signature was an independent predictor of malignant transformation when assessed in the test set, with the high-risk group showing worse prognosis [Hazard ratio = 12.65, p = 0.0003].
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates proof of principle that RNA extracted from FFPE diagnostic biopsies of OPMD, when analysed on the NanoString nCounter platform, can be used to generate a molecular classifier that stratifies the risk of malignant transformation with promising clinical utility.
METHODS: EGFR GCN was examined by in situ hybridization (ISH) in biopsies from 78 patients with OPMD and 92 patients with early-stage (stages I and II) OSCC. EGFR ISH signals were scored by two pathologists and a category assigned by consensus. The data were correlated with patient demographics and clinical outcomes.
RESULTS: OPMD with abnormal EGFR GCN were more likely to undergo malignant transformation than diploid cases. EGFR genomic gain was detected in a quarter of early-stage OSCC, but did not correlate with clinical outcomes.
CONCLUSION: These data suggest that abnormal EGFR GCN has clinical utility as a biomarker for the detection of OPMD destined to undergo malignant transformation. Prospective studies are required to verify this finding. It remains to be determined if EGFR GCN could be used to select patients for EGFR-targeted therapies.
IMPACT: Abnormal EGFR GCN is a potential biomarker for identifying OPMD that are at risk of malignant transformation. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(6); 927-35. ©2016 AACR.
METHODS: A total of 4,666 controls were pooled from several studies of cancer and HPV seropositivity, all tested within the same laboratory. HPV16 E6 seropositive controls were classified as having (i) moderate [mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) ≥ 484 and <1,000] or (ii) high seroreactivity (MFI ≥ 1,000). Associations of moderate and high HPV16 E6 seroreactivity with (i) demographic risk factors; and seropositivity for (ii) other HPV16 proteins (E1, E2, E4, E7, and L1), and (iii) E6 proteins from non-HPV16 types (HPV6, 11, 18, 31, 33, 45, and 52) were evaluated.
RESULTS: Thirty-two (0.7%) HPV16 E6 seropositive controls were identified; 17 (0.4%) with moderate and 15 (0.3%) with high seroreactivity. High HPV16 E6 seroreactivity was associated with former smoking [odds ratio (OR), 5.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-51.8], and seropositivity against HPV16 L1 (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.3-15.4); E2 (OR, 7.7; 95% CI, 1.4-29.1); multiple HPV16 proteins (OR, 25.3; 95% CI, 2.6-119.6 for three HPV16 proteins beside E6) and HPV33 E6 (OR, 17.7; 95% CI, 1.9-81.8). No associations were observed with moderate HPV16 E6 seroreactivity.
CONCLUSIONS: High HPV16 E6 seroreactivity is rare among individuals without diagnosed cancer and was not explained by demographic factors.
IMPACT: Some HPV16 E6 seropositive individuals without diagnosed HPV-driven cancer, especially those with seropositivity against other HPV16 proteins, may harbor a biologically relevant HPV16 infection.
METHODS: Using HPV serology as a marker of HPV-related cancer, we examined the interaction between smoking and HPV16 in 459 oropharyngeal (and 1445 oral cavity and laryngeal) cancer patients and 3024 control participants from two large European multi-centre studies. Odds ratios and credible intervals [CrI], adjusted for potential confounders, were estimated using Bayesian logistic regression.
RESULTS: Both smoking [odds ratio (OR [CrI]: 6.82 [4.52, 10.29]) and HPV seropositivity (OR [CrI]: 235.69 [99.95, 555.74]) were independently associated with oropharyngeal cancer. The joint association of smoking and HPV seropositivity was consistent with that expected on the additive scale (synergy index [CrI]: 1.32 [0.51, 3.45]), suggesting they act as independent risk factors for oropharyngeal cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: Smoking was consistently associated with increase in oropharyngeal cancer risk in models stratified by HPV16 seropositivity. In addition, we report that the prevalence of oropharyngeal cancer increases with smoking for both HPV16-positive and HPV16-negative persons. The impact of smoking on HPV16-positive oropharyngeal cancer highlights the continued need for smoking cessation programmes for primary prevention of head and neck cancer.