Background:MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small noncoding RNA molecules with an essential role in regulation of gene expression. miRNA expression profiles differ between tumor and normal control tissue in many types of cancers and miRNA profiling is seen as a promising field for finding new diagnostic and prognostic tools.Materials and Methods:In this study, we have analyzed expression of three miRNAs, miR-21, miR-125b, and miR-203, and their potential target proteins p53 and p63, known to be deregulated in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN), in two distinct and one mixed subsite in squamous cell carcinoma in the oral cavity.Results:We demonstrate that levels of miRNA differ between tumors of different subsites with tongue tumors showing significant deregulation of all three miRNAs, whereas gingival tumors only showed significant downregulation of miR-125b and the mixed group of tumors in tongue/floor of the mouth showed significant deregulation of miR-21 and miR-125b. In the whole group of oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), a significant negative correlation was seen between miR-125b and p53 as well as a significant correlation between TP53 mutation status and miR-125b.Conclusion:The present data once again emphasize the need to take subsite into consideration when analyzing oral SCC and clearly show that data from in vitro studies cannot be transferred directly to the in vivo situation.

Based on the present data, we recommend using expression of p63 as an additional factor contributing prognostic information in analysis of SCC in the tongue.

Background and purpose: An earlier prospective randomised multicentre study (ARTSCAN) in head and neck cancer patients that compared conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CF) with accelerated radiotherapy (AF) was inconclusive. In the subgroup of oral cavity squamous cell cancer (OCSCC) a large absolute, but not statistically significant, difference in local control was seen in favour of AF. This difference was more pronounced in resectable tumours. The finding raised the hypothesis that AF could be beneficial for OCSCC patients. In addition, the longstanding controversy on pre-or postoperative radiotherapy was addressed. Materials and methods: Patients with OCSCC, judged to withstand and likely benefit from combined therapy, were recruited. Subjects were randomised to either preoperative AF with 43 fractions given as a concomitant boost with two fractions/day to the tumour bearing volume to a total dose of 68 Gy in 4.5 weeks followed by surgery, or primary surgery with postoperative CF, total dose 60 or 66 Gy in 6-7 weeks. For patients whose tumours had high-risk features, 66 Gy and concomitant cisplatin was prescribed. Results: 250 patients were randomised. Median follow-up was 5 years for locoregional control (LRC) and 9 years for overall survival (OS). There were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment arms regarding LRC and OS. LRC at five years was 73% (95% CI, 65-82) in preoperative AF and 78% (95% CI, 70-85) in postoperative CF.Toxicity was more pronounced in preoperative AF. Conclusion: This study does not support that AF prior to surgery improves outcome in oral cavity cancer compared with postoperative CF.