No abstract

No abstract

Although 3-4 histological slices per implant seem to predict the 3D BIC, μCT might be advantageous because of its non-destructive 3D character. The healing time may not impact on the comparability.

BackgroundHead and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) are often divided by their aetiology. Noxae associated collectives are compared with the human papilloma virus (HPV)-associated group, whereas different localisations of oral (OSCC) and oropharyngeal (OPSCC) squamous cell carcinomas are mostly discussed as one single group. Our aim was to show that classification by aetiology is not appropriate for OSCC.ResultsHPV DNA was detected by PCR in 7 (3.47%) patients, and we identified 12 (5.94%) positive (+) cases by p16INK4a immunostaining. Only 4 (1.98%) of the p16INK4a+ cases were + for HPV using PCR. Our homogenous collective of OSCC allowed us to compare HPV+ and HPV negative (−) patients without creating bias for tumour localisation, age, gender or tumour stage.Materials and methodsAfter testing OSCC samples for HPV positivity, we compared the results of two commonly used HPV detection methods, p16INK4a immunostaining and HPV DNA-related PCR, on 202 OSCC patients. HPV subtypes were determined with an HPV LCD Array Kit. Clinicopathological features of the patients were analysed, and the disease specific survival rates (DSS) for HPV+ and HPV− patients were obtained.Conclusionsp16INK4a immunostaining is a not a reliable HPV detection method for OSCC. Positive p16INK4a immunostaining did not agree with + results from PCR of HPV DNA. Furthermore, the influence of HPV-related oncogenic transformation in OSCC is overestimated. The significance of HPV infection remains clinically unclear, and its influence on survival rates is not relevant to OSCC cases.

Mammary analogue secretory carcinoma (MASC) is a newly defined entity among salivary gland malignancies which has just been established in the 4th edition of the WHO classification of head and neck tumors. MASC (synonym: secretory carcinoma) are characterized by a specific rearangement of the ETV6 gene locus. Here, we present a series of 3 MASC cases including clinical data with follow-up for up to 26 months. All tumours immunhistochemically displayed strong positivity for cytokeratin 7, and mammaglobin, focal positivity for S100, cytokeratin 5/6 and muc-4. In contrast, immunhistochemical stainings against cytokeratin 14, hormon receptors, Her2/neu, androgen receptor and prostate-specific antigen were consistently negative. FISH analysis showed translocation of the ETV6 gene locus in the majority of tumour cell nuclei. During clinical follow-up, no local relapse or metastasis was detected. As these carcinomas are clinically and radiologically indistinguishable from other salivary gland tumours and as therapeutic approaches and prognosis might differ, we need to be able to diagnose MASC correctly.