Postoperative Radiotherapy Improved Survival in pT1-2N1 Oral and Oropharyngeal Cancer Without Adequate Neck Dissection ​

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-76241/v1

Abstract

Background: To assess the benefit of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with pT1-2N1M0 oral and oropharyngeal cancer by the quality of neck dissection.

Methods: In the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, pT1-2N1M0 oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients treated by primary tumor resection and neck dissection with or without radiotherapy were enrolled between 2004 and 2015. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to explore the effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival(DSS).

Results: Of the 1,765 patients identified, 1,108 (62.8%) had oral cancer, 1,141 (64.6%) were men, and 1,067 (60.5%) underwent adjuvant radiotherapy. After adjusting for confounding factors, postoperative radiotherapy reduced the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 5-year OS to 0.64 (95% confidence interval[CI], 0.49-0.84) in those with <18 lymph nodes removed, but not in those with 19-24 lymph nodes removed (aHR, 0.78 ; 95% CI, 0.73-1.13), and in those with >25 lymph nodes removed (aHR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.75-1.24). For 5-year DSS, similar effect was observed. The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.66 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.97) in those with <18 lymph nodes. The protective effect was not seen in those with 18-24 lymph nodes (aHR, 1.07; 95% CI 0.59-1.96), and in those with >25 lymph nodes (aHR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.81-1.56). Sensitivity testing also showed a robust protective effect of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with <18 lymph nodes removed.

Conclusion: Radiotherapy significantly improved survival in patients with pT1-2N1M0 oral and oropharyngeal cancer without adequate neck dissection. 

Background

Oral and oropharyngeal cancer remain among the most common malignancies in the world. Approximately 50% of these patients present with early stage (stage I-II) disease and primary surgery alone is the standard treatment, following National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Although most early stage oral and oropharyngeal patients have a favorable prognostic outcome, previous literatures have reported locoregional recurrence in 30–35% of patients, and around 20% will eventually die of the disease.1,2 The use of postoperative radiotherapy could improve tumor control and survival in those with advanced local disease (T3-4), close or positive margins, perineural or vascular invasion, multiple positive lymph nodes (LNs) (N2-3), and extracapsular extension.3 However, the routine use of postoperative radiotherapy for T1-2 stage disease limited to a single, ipsilateral positive LN not larger than 3 cm (i.e., N1) without adverse features remains controversial.4

Cervical positive LNs, those most commonly related to recurrence, are recognized as among the most important prognostic factors in head and neck cancer.5 Recent studies have confirmed that the number of evaluated LNs correlates with outcomes.6,7 Ebrahimi et al. reported that an LN yield < 18 was associated with worse 5-year overall (hazard ratio [HR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–3.6), disease-specific (HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.1–4.5), and disease-free survival (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1–2.8). Thus, LN yield  18 has been proposed as a cut-off point for good-quality neck dissection. Inadequate LN harvests may lead to stage migration and subsequent underestimation of disease severity.8,9 Although postoperative radiotherapy was considered in those with pN1 disease, scant studies investigated the survival benefit of postoperative radiotherapy for those without adequate LN dissection.

Thus, in this study, we used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to assess the relationship between postoperative radiotherapy and outcomes by quality of neck dissection in oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients with pT1-2N1 disease.

Methods

Data source and study population

SEER is an open access resource of data on patients from the United States for cancer-based epidemiology analyses. Data identification and extraction is done using the Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute SEER*Stat software (seer.cancer.gov/SEER*stat) Version 8.3.2. Patients with newly-diagnosed oral and oropharyngeal cancer post primary tumor resection and neck dissection with pathological pT1-2N1M0 without extranodal extension were identified from 2004 to 2015. Patients were identified using the International Classification of Disease for Oncology, third edition (ICD-O-3) codes for oral cavity (C01-C06; C14) and oropharynx (C09‐C10). These patients were staged according to the 6th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) classification system.10 Patients with missing data such as age, gender, radiotherapy, clear AJCC TNM stage, and follow-up data were excluded. Finally, a total of 1,765 patients were recruited into this analysis (Fig. 1). Patients were divided into those who received radiotherapy within six months of surgery (the postoperative radiotherapy group) and those who did not (the observation group). The end points were the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates. Deaths due to cancer were recorded as events and deaths secondary to other causes, at 5 years following diagnosis or the last follow up date, were recorded as censored.

Statistical analysis

All statistical operations were performed using SPSS (version 15, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Categorical variables were compared with Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Differences in continuous variables were analyzed with one-way ANOVA. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the 5-year OS and DSS rates for the postoperative radiotherapy and the observation group. In multivariate Cox regression analyses, the therapeutic effect of postoperative radiotherapy was analyzed after adjusting for age, gender, pathological T classification, level of differentiation, year of diagnosis, and marital status. A sensitivity test were also used to evaluate the association between postoperative radiotherapy and survival outcomes.11 A two-sided p-value (P < 0.05) was considered significant.12

Results

As shown in Table 1, a total of 1,765 newly-diagnosed oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients treated with primary tumor resection and neck dissection were enrolled, 1,108 (62.8%) diagnosed with oral cancer and 657 (37.2%) diagnosed with oropharyngeal cancer. Of these, 1,141 (64.6%) were men, the mean (standard deviation) age was 60.9 (12.4) years, and 1,067 (60.5%) underwent adjuvant radiotherapy. Patients with < 18 LNs retrieved were more likely to be older and have pT1 disease.

Table 1

Demographic and clinical characteristics of the oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients, n = 1,765.

 

Total

 

18 < LNs

 

18 ≦ LNs < 25

 

25 ≦ LNs

 

Variable

n = 1,765

 

n = 598

 

n = 289

 

n = 878

P value

RT

1,067 (60.5)

 

354 (59.2)

 

184 (63.7)

 

529 (60.3)

0.436

Gender

               

Female

624 (35.4)

 

230 (38.5)

 

100 (34.6)

 

294 (33.5)

0.139

Male

1,141 (64.6)

 

368 (61.5)

 

189 (65.4)

 

584 (66.5)

 

Age, years ( Mean ± SD)

60.9 ± 12.4

 

62.8 ± 12.6

 

60.7 ± 11.9

 

59.7 ± 12.2

< 0.001

Pathological T classification

               

T1

883 (50.0)

 

332 (55.5)

 

138 (47.8)

 

413 (47)

0.004

T2

882 (50.0)

 

266 (44.5)

 

151 (52.2)

 

465 (53)

 

Differentiation

               

Well

166 (9.4)

 

65 (10.9)

 

21 (7.3)

 

80 (9.1)

0.095

Moderately

1,021 (57.8)

 

329 (55)

 

186 (64.4)

 

506 (57.6)

 

Poorly

578 (32.7)

 

204 (34.1)

 

82 (28.4)

 

292 (33.3)

 

Site

               

Oral cavity

1,108 (62.8)

 

360 (60.2)

 

185 (64)

 

563 (64.1)

0.277

Oropharynx

657 (37.2)

 

238 (39.8)

 

104 (36)

 

315 (35.9)

 
Abbreviation: LNs, lymph nodes; RT, radiotherapy.

Table 2 and Fig. 2 illustrate the impact of postoperative radiotherapy on 5-year OS and DSS according to the quality of the retrieved LNs (poor-quality: <18 LNs retrieved; good-quality: 18–24 LNs retrieved; high-quality: 25 LNs retrieved). Compared to the observation group, the postoperative radiotherapy group had better 5-year OS rates and DSS rates (all, P < 0.05) in those with poor-quality neck dissection (< 18 LNs retrieved). This phenomenon was not observed in those with good-quality and high-quality neck dissection. After adjusting for other factors, the impact of postoperative radiotherapy was as follows: for those with < 18 LNs retrieved, the 5-year OS adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) was 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49–0.84); for those with 18–24 LNs retrieved, the aHR was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.73–1.13); for those with  25 LNs retrieved, the aHR was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.75–1.24). For 5-year DSS, in those with < 18 LNs retrieved, the aHR was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.45–0.97); for those with 18–24 LNs retrieved, the aHR was 1.07 (95%, 0.59–1.96); for those with > 25 LNs retrieved, the aHR was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.81–1.56) (Table 3). Postoperative radiotherapy had a protective effect on survival in patients with poor-quality neck dissection (< 18 LNs retrieved) alone. We also performed a sensitivity test. We assumed that some oral and orophargneal cancer patients might receive postoperative radiotherapy due to pathological risk features of the primary tumor, instead of nodal disease. The risk of lymphovascular, perineural invasion, or positive margin in pT1-2 disease was about 15%.13 Sensitivity test showed that the protective effect of postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy remained robust in those with poor-quality neck dissection (< 18 LNs retrieved) alone (aHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.45–0.81)(Table 4).

Table 2

The relationship between postoperative radiotherapy and observation groups in 5-year overall and disease-free survivals among different quality of neck dissection, n = 1,765.

 

LNs < 18

 

18 ≦ LNs < 25

 

25 ≦ LNs

 

Total

Event (%)

Survival rate (%)

P value

 

Total

Event (%)

Survival rate (%)

P value

 

Total

Event (%)

Survival rate (%)

P value

Overall Survival

598

215(36.0)

60.7

< 0.001

 

289

88(30.5)

65.1

0.025

 

878

263(30.0)

64.1

0.848

Without RT

244

111(45.5)

50.4

   

105

40(38.1)

56.4

   

349

103(29.5)

65.1

 

With RT

354

104(29.4)

67.8

   

184

48(26.1)

70.0

   

529

160(30.3)

63.4

 

Disease-Specific Survival

598

109(18.2)

78.0

0.003

 

289

47(16.3)

80.6

0.559

 

878

164(16.7)

76.7

0.199

Without RT

244

56(23.0)

71.7

   

105

18(17.1)

78.5

   

349

57(16.3)

79.5

 

With RT

354

53(15.0)

82.1

   

184

29(15.8)

81.8

   

529

107(20.2)

74.8

 

Abbreviation: LNs, lymph nodes; RT, radiotherapy.

Table 3

Multivariate analyses of risk factors regarding 5-year overall and disease-free survivals using Cox regression model among different quality of neck dissection, n = 1,765.

 

LNs < 18

 

18 ≦ LNs < 25

 

25 ≦ LNs

 

HR (95% C.I)

P value

 

HR (95% C.I)

P value

 

HR (95% C.I)

P value

Overall Survival

               

With RT

0.64 (0.49–0.84)

0.001

 

0.73 (0.48–1.13)

0.158

 

0.96 (0.75–1.24)

0.769

Male

0.86 (0.66–1.13)

0.279

 

1.01 (0.64–1.60)

0.961

 

1.08 (0.83–1.40)

0.557

Age

1.03 (1.02–1.05)

< 0.001

 

1.04 (1.02–1.06)

< 0.001

 

1.01 (1.002–1.02)

0.022

Pathological T classification: T2

1.62 (1.23–2.12)

0.001

 

1.89 (1.21–2.96)

0.005

 

1.72 (1.34–2.22)

< 0.001

Differentiation: Poorly

1.11 (0.81–1.52)

0.515

 

1.29 (0.80–2.10)

0.301

 

1.18 (0.89–1.55)

0.246

Site: Oropharynx

0.43 (0.30–0.62)

< 0.001

 

0.46 (0.26–0.82)

0.008

 

0.34 (0.24–0.47)

< 0.001

Disease-Specific Survival

               

With RT

0.66 (0.45–0.97)

0.033

 

1.07 (0.59–1.96)

0.822

 

1.12 (0.81–1.56)

0.491

Male

0.74 (0.51–1.08)

0.122

 

1.08 (0.58–2.01)

0.820

 

1.01 (0.73–1.40)

0.957

Age

1.02 (1.001–1.03)

0.043

 

1.03 (1.004–1.06)

0.023

 

1.00 (0.99–1.01)

0.715

Pathological T classification: T2

1.54 (1.06–2.25)

0.025

 

2.27 (1.21–4.26)

0.011

 

1.54 (1.12–2.12)

0.008

Differentiation: Poorly

1.26 (0.82–1.93)

0.297

 

1.68 (0.88–3.22)

0.117

 

1.34 (0.95–1.89)

0.098

Site: Oropharynx

0.33 (0.19–0.55)

< 0.001

 

0.19 (0.07–0.50)

0.001

 

0.28 (0.18–0.44)

< 0.001

*Adjusted for age, gender, pathological T classification, differentiation, site, race, marital and insurance.

**Abbreviation: LNs, lymph nodes; RT, radiotherapy.

Table 4

Multivariate analyses of risk factors regarding 5-year overall and disease-free survivals using Cox regression model among different quality of neck dissection, a sensitivity test (85%), n = 1,605.

 

LNs < 18

 

18 ≦ LNs < 25

 

25 ≦ LNs

 

HR (95% C.I)

P value

 

HR (95% C.I)

P value

 

HR (95% C.I)

P value

Overall Survival

               

With RT

0.61 (0.45–0.81)

0.001

 

0.70 (0.45–1.11)

0.128

 

0.99 (0.76–1.28)

0.931

Male

0.88 (0.66–1.18)

0.397

 

1.14 (0.69–1.87)

0.606

 

1.06 (0.81–1.39)

0.672

Age

1.04 (1.03–1.05)

< 0.001

 

1.04 (1.02–1.06)

0.001

 

1.01 (1.001–1.02)

0.038

Pathological T classification: T2

1.70 (1.28–2.25)

< 0.001

 

1.88 (1.17–3.03)

0.009

 

1.69 (1.30–2.20)

< 0.001

Differentiation: Poorly

1.10 (0.79–1.54)

0.562

 

1.27 (0.77–2.10)

0.357

 

1.20 (0.90–1.61)

0.209

Site: Oropharynx

0.48 (0.33–0.69)

< 0.001

 

0.52 (0.29–0.93)

0.028

 

0.33 (0.23–0.47)

< 0.001

Disease-Specific Survival

               

With RT

0.62 (0.41–0.93)

0.020

 

1.06 (0.57–1.99)

0.848

 

1.20 (0.86–1.67)

0.297

Male

0.76 (0.51–1.13)

0.169

 

1.12 (0.58–2.19)

0.732

 

0.97 (0.70–1.36)

0.868

Age

1.02 (1.01–1.04)

0.011

 

1.03 (0.99–1.06)

0.054

 

1.00 (0.98–1.01)

0.696

Pathological T classification: T2

1.65 (1.11–2.46)

0.013

 

2.01 (1.04–3.91)

0.039

 

1.49 (1.07–2.08)

0.017

Differentiation: Poorly

1.24 (0.79–1.96)

0.353

 

1.71 (0.87–3.35)

0.119

 

1.38 (0.97–1.98)

0.077

Site: Oropharynx

0.37 (0.21–0.63)

< 0.001

 

0.17 (0.06–0.48)

0.001

 

0.29 (0.19–0.46)

< 0.001

*Adjusted for age, gender, pathological T classification, differentiation, site, race, marital and insurance.

**Abbreviation: LNs, lymph nodes; RT, radiotherapy.

Discussion

In contrast to the latest NCCN guidelines which suggest adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with pN1 disease, our results demonstrated that postoperative radiotherapy was effective only in those without good-quality neck dissection (LN yield < 18).14,15 The protective effect of adjuvant radiotherapy failed to reach statistical significance for those with LN yield > 18. Because of the protective role of postoperative radiotherapy in oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients with pT1-2N1M0 disease without good-quality neck dissection, the NCCN guidelines for adjuvant radiotherapy in pN1 disease without adverse features may need to be modified according to the quality of retrieved LNs.

Several studies have demonstrated that pN1 may itself be an indication for postoperative radiotherapy after resection of oral cavity primary tumors.4,16 Chen et al. reported an association of postoperative radiotherapy with improved OS for 1,467 patients from the National Cancer Database with oral (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63–0.92) and oropharyngeal cancer (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41–0.92) with pN1 disease without adverse feature, especially in those younger than 70 years or those with pT2 disease. Shrime et al., in an analysis of 1,539 patients with T-21N1 oral cancer, found that 78.6% had postoperative radiotherapy, which was associated with better 5-year OS (54.2% vs 41.4%, P < 0.001).17 However, from the same SEER database, Kao et al. found no significant difference in 5-year OS between patients with N1 oral cancer with and without postoperative radiotherapy (38.7% vs 36.0%, P = 0.23).18 One explanation for these different results may be that inadequate LN harvests could lead to stage migration and subsequent underestimation of disease severity, especially in those with pN1disease.5 To our knowledge, our study is the first to evaluate the benefit of postoperative radiotherapy by quality of neck dissection in patients with pN1 involvement and no risk factors. Moreover, our large cohort (n = 1,765) indicates that the effect of operative radiotherapy on survival could assist clinicians in their therapeutic planning for these patients.

Because cervical LN metastasis significantly worsens the prognosis of patients with primary head and neck cancer by 50%, in general, the status of LN metastasis must be known for proper treatment.1 Many studies have used LN count as a prognostic factor in head and neck cancer patients and also as a potential quality metric for neck dissection.6,8 Divi et. al examined these associations in a large cohort from the U.S. National Cancer Database.19 They found an independent and significant association between examining < 18 LNs and increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13–1.22). When patients were stratified by clinical nodal stage, the hazard of death was increased in both node negative and node positive groups (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.17–1.32; HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05–1.19, respectively). The study found a significant overall survival advantage when > 18 LNs are examined after neck dissection, concluding that 18 LNs is an effective cutoff for improved survival.

Although several studies have outlined the importance of LN yield on head and neck cancer, few have discussed the association of postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy with the quality of neck dissection.20,21 According to the latest NCCN guidelines, postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy may be considered in those with pN1 disease without other risk features.14 Our study explored the impact of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with pT1-2N1M0 without extranodal extension stratified by the number of retrieved LNs. For patients without good-quality neck dissection (LN yield < 18), postoperative adjuvant therapy could reduce the mortality rate 40%. However, patients with good-quality neck dissection (LN yield > 18) did not have a statistically significant reduction in 5-year OS or DSS (Tables 3 and 4). To spare them the potential side effects of pain, dry mouth, swallowing dysfunction, and neck fibrosis, postoperative radiotherapy could be omitted in such patients.

At present, treatment protocols for head and neck cancer, such NCCN guidelines, incorporate the TNM stage, surgical margin, pathological adverse features, and response to chemotherapy or radiotherapy.14 Margin status could be regarded as a proxy of surgery quality for primary tumor resection, although compartment surgery more than wide resection had better outcomes.22 However, neck dissection quality is not included in the treatment guidelines, even though retrieving more than 10 LNs in elective neck dissection and more than 15 in radical neck dissection has been suggested in order to prevent stage migration.10 For head and neck patients with pN1 disease, reports of the association between disease outcomes and adjuvant radiotherapy are conflicting.23,24 The confusion may stem in part from the heterogenous pattern of pN1 disease (which ranges from microscopic disease to 3 cm LNs), the extent of extracapsular spread, the various cancer subsites, and the quality of the neck dissection. In 2019, an expert panel suggested adjuvant radiotherapy in oral cancer patients with pN1 disease without good-quality neck dissection (< 18 LNs) and recommended the conduct of further prospective clinical trials.25 Our report provides evidence for the therapeutic effect of adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with pT1-2N1M0 oral cancer. Among patients without good-quality neck dissection, adjuvant radiotherapy could reduce the mortality rate up to 40% (aHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.48–0.78). Radiotherapy appears to offset the negative effect of poor-quality neck dissection and its therapeutic effect decreased as the number of retrieved LNs increased (Fig. 2).

There are several limitations in our series. First, the radiation field was not clearly described in the database. The radiation field might include the primary tumor, regional neck area, or both. These data could be not be extracted from the SEER database. Second, we tried to explore the effect of postoperative radiotherapy in pT1-2N1M0 patients and assumed that the radiotherapy was probably directed to the neck region for pN1 status. However, postoperative radiotherapy could be applied to the primary site due to the pathological features of the primary tumor. The positive margin has been reported to be around 1.6% in early stage oral cancer surgery.26 In T1-2 oral cancer patients, the rate of lymphovascluar permeation or perineural invasion is 13.3%.26 In sensitivity testing in our study, the effect of postoperative radiotherapy remained robust among patients without good-quality neck dissection, when the association of margin status, lymphovascluar permeation, or perineural invasion in the primary tumor were considered. Third, the study included only pT1-2N1M0 patients. Generalization of these results to other oral cancer patients, such as those with T3-4N1M0, will require additional studies.

Conclusions

Oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients with pT1-2N1M0 have a generally favorable prognostic outcome. However, inadequate LN harvest may lead to underestimation of disease severity. Our results suggest that postoperative radiotherapy should be considered for patients without adequate neck dissection. Modification of NCCN guidelines according to the number of retrieved LNs for postoperative radiotherapy in pN1 disease without an adverse feature may be appropriate.

Abbreviations

NCCN, National Comprehensive Cancer Network 

LNs, lymph nodes

SEER, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results

ICD-O-3, International Classification of Disease for Oncology, third edition

AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer

TNM, tumor-node-metastasis

OS, overall survival

DSS, disease-specific survival

aHR, adjusted hazard ratio

CI, confidence interval

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Institutional Review Board of Chi Mei Medical Center (IRB:CMFHR10612‐008).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used during the present study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding: This study was partly supported by Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital (Grants No. VGHKS107-135 and VGHKS108-170) and the Ministry of Science and Technology (Grant No. MOST108-2314-B-075B-004). The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Authors' contributions:

CCY, CHY and CCL: project conception and design, data collection, assembly, analysis and interpretation, manuscript writing. BHK, and WSL: data collection and assembly. CCY and CCL revised and approved the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the personnel at the Cancer Center, Department of Medical Education and Research, and the Research Center of Medical Informatics of Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital for providing information in response to inquiries and assistance in data processing.

References

  1. Woolgar JA, Rogers S, West CR, Errington RD, Brown JS, Vaughan ED. Survival and patterns of recurrence in 200 oral cancer patients treated by radical surgery and neck dissection. Oral Oncol. 1999;35(3):257–65.
  2. Rogers SN, Brown JS, Woolgar JA, et al. Survival following primary surgery for oral cancer. Oral Oncol. 2009;45(3):201–11.
  3. Bernier J, Domenge C, Ozsahin M, et al. Postoperative irradiation with or without concomitant chemotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(19):1945–52.
  4. Ivaldi E, Di Mario D, Paderno A, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for early oral cavity cancer (pT1-2,N0-1): A review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2019;143:67–75.
  5. Lee CC, Su YC, Hung SK, et al. Recommendation for incorporation of a different lymph node scoring system in future AJCC N category for oral cancer. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):14117.
  6. Ebrahimi A, Zhang WJ, Gao K, Clark JR. Nodal yield and survival in oral squamous cancer: Defining the standard of care. Cancer. 2011;117(13):2917–25.
  7. Lemieux A, Kedarisetty S, Raju S, Orosco R, Coffey C. Lymph Node Yield as a Predictor of Survival in Pathologically Node Negative Oral Cavity Carcinoma. Otolaryngology–head neck surgery: official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery. 2016;154(3):465–72.
  8. Divi V, Chen MM, Nussenbaum B, et al. Lymph Node Count From Neck Dissection Predicts Mortality in Head and Neck Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016.
  9. Gil Z, Carlson DL, Boyle JO, et al. Lymph node density is a significant predictor of outcome in patients with oral cancer. Cancer. 2009;115(24):5700–10.
  10. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(1):7–30.
  11. Chang TS, Chang CM, Ho HC, et al. Impact of young age on the prognosis for oral cancer: a population-based study in Taiwan. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e75855.
  12. McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, Naylor CD, Stiell IG, Richardson WS. Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 2000;284(1):79–84.
  13. Lee CC, Huang CY, Lin YS, et al. Prognostic Performance of a New Staging Category to Improve Discrimination of Disease-Specific Survival in Nonmetastatic Oral Cancer. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;143(4):395–402.
  14. Pfister DG, Spencer S, Adelstein D, et al. Head and Neck Cancers, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2020;18(7):873–98.
  15. Lin CY, Fan KH, Lee LY, et al. Precision Adjuvant Therapy Based on Detailed Pathologic Risk Factors for Resected Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Long-Term Outcome Comparison of CGMH and NCCN Guidelines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020;106(5):916–25.
  16. Rajappa SK, Maheshwari U, Ram D, et al. Early oral cavity cancer: The prognostic factors and impact of adjuvant radiation on survival. Head Neck. 2019;41(10):3577–83.
  17. Shrime MG, Gullane PJ, Dawson L, et al. The impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on survival in T1-2N1 squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;136(3):225–8.
  18. Kao J, Lavaf A, Teng MS, Huang D, Genden EM. Adjuvant radiotherapy and survival for patients with node-positive head and neck cancer: an analysis by primary site and nodal stage. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71(2):362–70.
  19. Divi V, Chen MM, Nussenbaum B, et al. Lymph Node Count From Neck Dissection Predicts Mortality in Head and Neck Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(32):3892–7.
  20. Iocca O, Di Maio P, De Virgilio A, et al. Lymph node yield and lymph node ratio in oral cavity and oropharyngeal carcinoma: Preliminary results from a prospective, multicenter, international cohort. Oral Oncol. 2020;107:104740.
  21. Mallen-St Clair J. Quality Metrics in Oral Cavity Cancer-Developing Standards for Optimal Lymph Node Yield. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;143(10):973–4.
  22. Calabrese L, Giugliano G, Bruschini R, et al. Compartmental surgery in tongue tumours: description of a new surgical technique. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2009;29(5):259–64.
  23. Jackel MC, Ambrosch P, Christiansen H, Martin A, Steiner W. Value of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with pathologic N1 neck disease. Head Neck. 2008;30(7):875–82.
  24. Swaminath A, Knox JJ, Brierley JD, et al. Changes in Liver Volume Observed Following Sorafenib and Liver Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94(4):729–37.
  25. Koyfman SA, Ismaila N, Crook D, et al. Management of the Neck in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity and Oropharynx: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(20):1753–74.
  26. D'Cruz AK, Vaish R, Kapre N, et al. Elective versus Therapeutic Neck Dissection in Node-Negative Oral Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(6):521–9.