2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.08.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prognostic impact of the level of nodal involvement: retrospective analysis of patients with advanced oral squamous cell carcinoma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…97 Similar findings have been demonstrated by several others. [98][99][100][101] In another interesting study, the impact of the involvement of facial lymph node on survival was assessed. Of 641 OSCC patients, 103 presented with metastasis to facial lymph nodes and were strongly associated with poor disease control and lower survival rates.…”
Section: Cellular Cannibalismmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…97 Similar findings have been demonstrated by several others. [98][99][100][101] In another interesting study, the impact of the involvement of facial lymph node on survival was assessed. Of 641 OSCC patients, 103 presented with metastasis to facial lymph nodes and were strongly associated with poor disease control and lower survival rates.…”
Section: Cellular Cannibalismmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our results are consistent with these findings. However, Murakami et al reported a lower incidence of lymph node metastasis in OSCC patients: 2.9% for level IV and 1.0% for level V . However, these findings may have been affected by the fact that the patients received preoperative CRT.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Such patients undergo only adjuvant radiation therapy [7,14]. Despite the fact that the statistically significant negative effects of intermediate risk factors have been confirmed in many studies, only the positive resection margins and extracapsular nodal tumor extension remain independent factors [8,9,[14][15][16][17].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%