LNR is a better prognostic marker than the current N staging of TNM classification.

No abstract

No abstract

Imaging is an integral part of head and neck cancer staging and assessing resectability. Accurate perception of imaging information by the clinician is possible only by effective communication between radiologist and surgeon. Traditionally, the radiologist studies the head neck region with two dimensional cross-sectional imaging. The surgeon perceives the head and neck region by real-time experience at surgery as a threedimensional (3D) space. Advances in computed tomography (multidetector CT) provide multiplanar and 3D reformations as added tools to facilitate understanding the complex anatomy and pathology and improve accuracy in staging. Despite these aids, accurate information requires a precise understanding of the different nomenclature of suprahyoid spaces used by the radiologist and clinician. While clinicians are familiar with infratemporal fossa (ITF), radiologists are familiar with masticator space (MS). Although these have been used interchangeably in the staging systems, the subtle difference needs to be understood. Literature also has differing definitions of the parapharyngeal space (PPS). This article describes these spaces, the varied definitions of PPS and the implications of involvement of structures of the ITF and MS on T staging of head neck cancers. A practical approach to the differential diagnoses of parapharyngeal lesions is also described.

Our data suggest that the ELISA-based estimation of pre-surgical serum CD44 concentration could be a non-invasive reliable method distinguishing high-risk recurrent tumours which can further assist in post-surgery treatment planning.

No abstract

Background Medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) is a rare subtype of thyroid cancer. Other than gain‐of‐function RET mutations, no other genetic, lifestyle or environmental risk associations have been established for MTC. Several case‐control studies and meta‐analysis have examined the risk association of different SNPs with MTC in different populations but with contradictory or inconclusive results. Methods In a large cohort of 438 Indian MTC cases and 489 gender and ethnicity matched healthy controls from 1000 genome project, a comprehensive risk association of 13 SNPs of three pathways—detoxification, cell cycle regulation and RET was performed along with meta‐analysis of RET SNPs. Results Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified a protective risk association of CDKN1ASer31Arg SNP with both hereditary (OR 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13‐0.55; P < .001) and sporadic MTC (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36‐0.78; P = .001). An increased risk association was identified for NAT2Y94Y SNP (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.17‐2.25, P = .004) and CDKN2A3′UTR SNP (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.19‐2.98, P = .006) with sporadic MTC and RET S904S with hereditary MTC (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.64‐4.86, P < .001). Meta‐analysis of RET SNPs including our cohort identified increased risk association of all four RET SNPs with MTC. Conclusion In this largest SNP risk association study for MTC and the only risk association study of the 13 most commonly studied MTC associated SNPs in a single cohort of this rare cancer, a significant protective risk association of CDKN1ASer31Arg SNP with MTC was shown for the first time. Meta‐analysis identified significant risk association of all four RET SNPs, not observed in previous meta‐analysis.

PURPOSE The objective of this study was to explore the potential role and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in tumor shrinkage and resultant mandibular preservation in oral cancers compared with conventional surgical treatment. METHODS This study was a single-center, randomized, phase II trial of treatment-naive histologically confirmed squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity with cT2-T4 and N0/N+, M0 (American Joint Committee on Cancer, seventh edition) stage, necessitating resection of the mandible for paramandibular disease in the absence of clinicoradiologic evidence of bone erosion. The patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either upfront surgery (segmental resection) followed by adjuvant treatment (standard arm [SA]) or two cycles of NACT (docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil) at 3-week intervals (intervention arm [IA]), followed by surgery dictated by postchemotherapy disease extent. All patients in the IA received adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and patients in the SA were treated as per final histopathology report. The primary end point was mandible preservation rate. The secondary end points were disease-free survival and treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS Sixty-eight patients were enrolled over 3 years and randomly assigned to either SA (34 patients) or IA (34 patients). The median follow-up was 3.6 years (interquartile range 0.95-7.05 years). Mandibular preservation was achieved in 16 of 34 patients (47% [95% CI, 31.49 to 63.24]) in the IA. The disease-free survival ( P = .715, hazard ratio 0.911 [95% CI, 0.516 to 1.607]) and overall survival ( P = .747, hazard ratio 0.899 [95% CI, 0.510 to 1.587]) were similar in both the arms. Complications were similar in both arms, but chemotherapy-induced toxicity was observed in the majority of patients (grade III: 14, 41.2%; grade IV: 11, 32.4%) in the IA. CONCLUSION NACT plays a potential role in mandibular preservation in oral cancers with acceptable toxicities and no compromise in survival. However, this needs to be validated in a larger phase III randomized trial.