In spite of successful curative surgery for buccal mucosa carcinoma the health-related quality-of-life continues to remain poor

Ghai, Suhani; Pillai, Ajay; Sharma, Yogesh; Singh, Rajeev Kumar; Jain, Neha; Sharma, Shambhu N.

doi:10.1007/s10006-021-00959-7

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One study did not mention age of patients (Vakil et al, 2012 ) and three studies categorised patients in age groups without further details about mean and SD (Rogers & Lowe, 2020 ; Yue et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ). Studies were mainly conducted in China (Fang et al, 2014 ; Fang et al, 2013 ; Gu et al, 2021 ; Li et al, 2013 ; X. Li, Sun, & Guo, 2016 ; W. Li, Zhang et al, 2016 ; Wu et al, 2020 ; Yan et al, 2017 ; Yang et al, 2014 ; Yuan et al, 2016 ; Yue et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ; Zhang et al, 2013 ), followed by India (Agarwal et al, 2014 ; Ghai et al, 2021 ; Sakthivel et al, 2017 ; Vora et al, 2017 ), the United Kingdom (Bekiroglu et al, 2011 ; Devine et al, 2001 ; Rogers et al, 2004 ; Rogers & Lowe, 2020 ), Brazil (Seferin et al, 2022 ; Soares et al, 2018 ), the United States (Larson et al, 2021 ; Ochoa et al, 2021 ), Germany (Hoene et al, 2021 ) and Pakistan (Vakil et al, 2012 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some studies, patients administered the questionnaire at least once pre‐ and post‐treatment (Agarwal et al, 2014 ; Yan et al, 2017 ). Patients in other studies administered the questionnaire only once post‐treatment (Bekiroglu et al, 2011 ; Devine et al, 2001 ; Fang et al, 2013 ; Fang et al, 2014 ; Ghai et al, 2021 ; Gu et al, 2021 ; Larson et al, 2021 ; Li et al, 2013 ; Li et al, 2016 ; Ochoa et al, 2021 ; Sakthivel et al, 2017 ; Seferin et al, 2022 ; Soares et al, 2018 ; Vakil et al, 2012 ; Vora et al, 2017 ; Wu et al, 2020 ; Yang et al, 2014 ; Yue et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2013 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ). The questionnaire was administered twice post‐treatment in two studies (Rogers & Lowe, 2020 ; Yuan et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subgroups of studies: 2 = Bekiroglu et al ( 2011 ) ( I : no RT, II : RT); 3 = Devine et al ( 2001 ) ( I : LSM, II : V/MLR); 5 = Fang et al ( 2014 ) ( I : FF rec., II : no FF rec. ); 6 = Ghai et al ( 2021 ) ( I : T1 without RT, II : T2 without RT, III : T1 and T2 with RT); 7 = Gu et al ( 2021 ) ( I : ND with submandibular gland preservation, II : conventional ND); 9 = Larson et al ( 2021 ) ( I : lateral FOM, II : anterior FOM, III : alveolar ridge with FOM); 11 = Li et al ( 2016 ) ( I : PMMF, II : RFFF); 12 = Li et al ( 2016 ) ( I : RT pre‐Tx, II : RT post‐Tx, III : RT pre‐ and post‐Tx, IV : no RT); 14 = Rogers et al ( 2004 ) ( I : nil, II : rim res., III : segment res. ); 16 = Sakthivel et al ( 2017 ) ( I : surgery, II : adjuvant therapy); 17 = Seferin et al ( 2022 ) ( I : sentinel lymph node biopsy, II : cervical ND levels I–III); 21 = Wu et al ( 2020 ) ( I : classic ALTFF, II : chimeric ALTFF); 22 = Yan et al ( 2017 ) ( I : long‐term survivors, II : non‐survivors); 24 = Yuan et al ( 2016 ) ( I : RFFF, II : ALTFF); 25 = Yue et al ( 2018 ) ( I : tongue, II : other, III : no rec., IV : rec.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another focus of attention is the survey follow‐up time. Twenty of the 27 studies had patients complete the questionnaire only once, making it impossible to evaluate changes in chewing capacity (Devine et al, 2001 ; Fang et al, 2014 ; Fang et al, 2013 ; Ghai et al, 2021 ; Gu et al, 2021 ; Larson et al, 2021 ; Li et al, 2013 ; Li et al, 2016 ; Li et al, 2016 ; Ochoa et al, 2021 ; Sakthivel et al, 2017 ; Seferin et al, 2022 ; Soares et al, 2018 ; Vakil et al, 2012 ; Vora et al, 2017 ; Wu et al, 2020 ; Yang et al, 2014 ; Yue et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ). Three of these studies had an assessment range of 1 year or less (Gu et al, 2021 ; Vakil et al, 2012 ; Wu et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the type of primary treatment differed: Besides primary surgery (tumour resection), a (selective/functional) neck dissection was performed in some studies(Agarwal et al, 2014;Bekiroglu et al, 2011;Devine et al, 2001;Fang et al, 2013;Fang et al, 2014;Ochoa et al, 2021;Sakthivel et al, 2017;Seferin et al, 2022;Wu et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2014;Yue et al, 2018). Most surgical treatments included reconstruction(Devine et al, 2001;Fang et al, 2014;Ghai et al, 2021;Gu et al, 2021;Hoene et al, 2021;Larson et al, 2021;Li et al, 2013;Rogers et al, 2004;Rogers & Lowe, 2020;Sakthivel et al, 2017;Soares et al, 2018;Vora et al, 2017;Wu et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2014;Yuan et al, 2016;Yue et al, 2018;Zhang et al, 2013;Zhang et al, 2020). Only two studies did not apply or mention adjuvant therapy(Ochoa et al, 2021;Yang et al, 2014).One study did not report any treatment details(Vakil et al, 2012).As stated in the inclusion criteria, HR-QoL outcomes were assessed in all studies by using the UW-QoL questionnaire.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Mastication in health‐related quality of life in patients treated for oral cancer: A systematic review

Vermaire

Partoredjo

Groot

et al. 2022

European J Cancer Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Treatment for oral cancer can impair oral functions such as mastication, which may negatively affect quality of life (QoL). In this review, an overview is provided of masticatory ability in patients treated for oral cancer. Methods The PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for scientific literature on masticatory ability in relation to QoL in patients treated for oral cancer. Studies were included when oral cancer treatment was provided, and the University of Washington Quality of Life (UW‐QoL) questionnaire was used. Risk of bias (MINORS) was independently assessed by two authors. Results The PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase and Cochrane search yielded 575 unique records of which 111 were assessed full text, and 27 studies were included. The UW‐QoL mastication scores ranged from 31.9 to 97.4. There was a wide variety in methodology, patient groups, tumour site, treatment and assessment moment, to such a degree that outcome scores are difficult to compare. Conclusion The wide variety in studies exploring health‐related QoL in relation to mastication in oral cancer patients prevents the identification of possible relations between treatment, masticatory ability and QoL. Our findings underline the limitations in currently available literature and indicate the necessity for more comparable research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Mastication in health‐related quality of life in patients treated for oral cancer: A systematic review

Vermaire

Partoredjo

Groot

et al. 2022

European J Cancer Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Prognostic risk factors of buccal squamous cell carcinoma: A case–control study

Callander,

Souza,

Eltawil

et al. 2024

Head & Neck

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo describe the clinicopathologic presentation of buccal squamous cell carcinoma and identify risks factors for recurrence and overall survival.MethodsThis is a retrospective case–control study of patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC) treated at a single tertiary care center between 2010 and 2022. All patients with buccal subsite OCSCC treated during this time frame were included and paired with a randomly selected age and gender matched patient with non‐buccal OCSCC. Relevant data was collected via chart review.ResultsSeventy‐seven patients with buccal SCC were matched with 77 non‐buccal OCSCC controls. The median follow‐up time was 27 months (IQR 14–61). Median age was 67 years (IQR 57–75) and 53% of the cohort was female. Twenty (26%) buccal SCC patients experienced a recurrence versus 19 (25%) in the controls. Age ≥65‐years‐old increased odds of all‐cause mortality in the buccal SCC group, but not in the control group. Perineural invasion and positive margins increased odds of recurrence in the buccal group only. Overall survival and progression‐free survival did not differ between the groups, despite a greater number of T2 buccal tumors and T1 non‐buccal tumors.ConclusionsBuccal SCC presents at a higher T stage than other oral cavity SCC subsite and may exhibit variance in the pathologic risk factors that predict poor outcomes versus non‐buccal OCSCC. Despite these relatively minor differences, however, oncologic outcomes between these groups were similar.

show abstract

Radiotherapy does not improve survival in patients with positive margins: Need to revise the guidelines?

Kumar¹,

Ghai²

2021

Oral Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In spite of successful curative surgery for buccal mucosa carcinoma the health-related quality-of-life continues to remain poor

Cited by 3 publications

References 15 publications

Mastication in health‐related quality of life in patients treated for oral cancer: A systematic review

Mastication in health‐related quality of life in patients treated for oral cancer: A systematic review

Prognostic risk factors of buccal squamous cell carcinoma: A case–control study

Radiotherapy does not improve survival in patients with positive margins: Need to revise the guidelines?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About