Cancer stem cells and field cancerization of head and neck cancer - An update

Bansal, Richa; Nayak, Bikash; Bhardwaj, Shweta; Vanajakshi, C N; Das, Pragyan Paramita; Somayaji, Nagaveni S; Sharma, Sonika

doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_443_20

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The location of the index tumour in hypopharynx or oropharynx was related to an increased risk of appearance of SPTs, with a stronger association when the SPT was of high grade. These tumours have a higher difficulty in early diagnosis than other HNC sites (Hamada et al, 2018 ), and this might favour the persistence of preneoplastic fields of genetically altered cells (‘field cancerisation’ phenomenon) described in the head and neck area (Bansal et al, 2020 ; Leemans et al, 2011 ). This peculiar characteristic could also explain the higher risk found with the presence of premalignant lesions that comprise other clones of stigmatised cancer cells invisible to routine clinical and histological examination (Holmstrup & Dabelsteen, 2016 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors associated with the development of second primary tumours in head and neck cancer patients

Salcedo‐Bellido

Requena

Mateos

et al. 2022

European J Cancer Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:The development of second primary tumours (SPTs) is one of the main causes of low survival in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). The aim of this study was to review the evidence about factors associated with developing SPTs in patients with HNC.Methods: An updated systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, and the search was performed in Pubmed and Scopus. Only original articles with a cohort or casecontrol design were included. Article quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.Results: Thirty-six and two case-control studies were included, with quality medium (n = 5) to high (n = 33). Tobacco showed a significant association with SPT development, with risks ranging from 1.41 (95%CI: 1.04-1.91) to 5.52 (95%CI: 2.91-10.49).Regarding alcohol, risks ranged from 1.46 (95%CI: 1.12-1.91) to 21.3 (95%CI: 2.9-156). Location of the index tumour in the hypopharynx/oropharynx, absence of human papillomavirus and presence of a premalignant lesion also increased the risk of SPTs. More controversy was found for sex, age and other clinical factors of the tumour. Conclusion:Toxic lifestyle habits and clinical factors were associated with the risk of SPTs in HNC patients. These findings may improve individualised prevention strategies in its follow-up.head and neck cancer, second primary tumours | INTRODUCTIONHead and neck cancer (HNC) has a significant burden worldwide. This heterogeneous group of tumours (including lip, oral cavity, larynx and pharynx) occupies the eighth position in incidence worldwide, with 858,348 new cases in 2020, that is up to 4.6% of all cancers (Sung et al., 2021). Last trends indicate an expected incidence increase in most of the HNC tumours (Aupérin, 2020;Simard et al., 2014).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors associated with the development of second primary tumours in head and neck cancer patients

Salcedo‐Bellido

Requena

Mateos

et al. 2022

European J Cancer Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cellular Basis: The polyclonal origin, mutations occur in multiple sites of the epithelium due to continuous carcinogen exposure and thereby lead to multi-focal carcinomas/ lesions of independent origin [13].…”

Section: Origin Of Field Cancerizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral Field Cancerization: A Review with Case Reports

2022

IJOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of field cancerization was proposed by Slaughter et al. in 1953. Field cancerization of the mucosa of aerodigestive tract frequently develops on account of tobacco and alcohol usage. The oral cavity is one of the predominant and prevalent sites of development of potential malignancies, therefore, it comes into direct contact with many carcinogens. All of the epithelium beyond the boundaries of tumour can undergo histological changes and may have more than one independent area of malignancy. The mucosa undergoes a change, perhaps due to carcinogen exposure and is therefore more susceptible to the development of many foci of malignant transformation. This explains the high incidence of recurrence of oral cancer, the rate being 32.7%, despite excision of tumour or other therapies. So, diagnosis and treatment of oral cancer should not only be focused on the lesion, but also on the field from which it developed. In this article, we emphasize on the concept of field cancerization, highlight the carcinogenic influence of tobacco and alcohol in the development of multiple primary tumours in the oral cavity by presenting clinical cases. Keywords: Field cancerization; Squamous cell carcinoma; Metastasis; Second primary tumours; Synchronous/ Metachronous tumours3.

show abstract

“…The genetically altered keratinocytes in the field of precancerization may have identical molecular profiles if they evolved from one stem/progenitor basal cell that has underwent clonal expansion to form a monoclone; may have similar but not identical molecular profiles if they descended from subclones that evolved by clonal divergence from a monoclone, hence being clonally related; or may have dissimilar molecular profiles if they evolved from several stem/progenitor basal cells that underwent an independent initial transformation and subsequent unrelated clonal expansion, giving rise to a polyclonal population of precancerised keratinocytes [20,39]. As IR or any other cancer therapy cannot eradicate the entire field of precancerization, because it is neither clinically or histologically detectable, nor its extent determinable, persons who have been treated for primary oral SCC with IR are at increased risk of developing a 'new' cancer in the field of precancerization [20].…”

Section: Ionizing Radiation Epithelial Field Of Precancerisation and Secondary Primary Tumours In Relation To Oral Sccmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological consequences of cancer radiotherapy in the context of oral squamous cell carcinoma

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approximately 50% of subjects with cancer have been treated with ionizing radiation (IR) either as a curative, adjuvant, neoadjuvant or as a palliative agent, at some point during the clinical course of their disease. IR kills cancer cells directly by injuring their DNA, and indirectly by inducing immunogenic cell killing mediated by cytotoxic T cells; but it can also induce harmful biological responses to non-irradiated neighbouring cells (bystander effect) and to more distant cells (abscopal effect) outside the primary tumour field of irradiation.Although IR can upregulate anti-tumour immune reactions, it can also promote an immunosuppressive tumour microenvironment. Consequently, radiotherapy by itself is seldom sufficient to generate an effective long lasting immune response that is capable to control growth of metastasis, recurrence of primary tumours and development of second primary cancers. Therefore, combining radiotherapy with the use of immunoadjuvants such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, can potentiate IR-mediated anti-tumour immune reactions, bringing about a synergic immunogenic cell killing effect.The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss some aspects of IR-induced biological responses, including factors that contributes to tumour radiosensitivity/radioresistance, immunogenic cell killing, and the abscopal effect.

show abstract

Cancer stem cells and field cancerization of head and neck cancer - An update

Cited by 12 publications

References 24 publications

Factors associated with the development of second primary tumours in head and neck cancer patients

Factors associated with the development of second primary tumours in head and neck cancer patients

Oral Field Cancerization: A Review with Case Reports

Biological consequences of cancer radiotherapy in the context of oral squamous cell carcinoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About