Cancers · 2024
A Retrospective Analysis from Western Romania Comparing the Treatment and Survivability of p16-Positive versus p16-Negative Oropharyngeal Cancer.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chioreanu Alexandru, Balica Nicolae Constatin, Mot Cristian Ion, Bugari Radmila, Morar Raluca, Baderca Flavia, Marti Teodora Daniela, Boru Casiana, Avram Cecilia Roberta, Dema Sorin, Vulcanescu Dan Dumitru, Horhat Delia Ioana
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Oropharyngeal cancer is a global health concern due to its multifaceted nature. Recent molecular studies have linked p16 overexpression, associated with the human papillomavirus, to oropharyngeal cancer and its prognostic implications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study in Western Romania examined 60 patients, categorizing them based on p16 biomarker status: 28 were p16 positive, and 32 were p16 negative. Statistical tests, including Fisher's exact and chi2, were used for analysis.
RESULTS: Patients with p16-positive oropharyngeal cancer exhibited a better prognosis (3-year survival, p = 0.0477; midtreatment, p = 0.0349) and reported lower alcohol (p = 0.0046) and tobacco (p < 0.0001) use.
CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the importance of p16 testing in oropharyngeal carcinoma diagnosis. It suggests modifying treatment approaches based on p16 status and underscores the differing prognoses associated with p16-positive and p16-negative cases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study in Western Romania examined 60 patients, categorizing them based on p16 biomarker status: 28 were p16 positive, and 32 were p16 negative. Statistical tests, including Fisher's exact and chi2, were used for analysis.
RESULTS: Patients with p16-positive oropharyngeal cancer exhibited a better prognosis (3-year survival, p = 0.0477; midtreatment, p = 0.0349) and reported lower alcohol (p = 0.0046) and tobacco (p < 0.0001) use.
CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the importance of p16 testing in oropharyngeal carcinoma diagnosis. It suggests modifying treatment approaches based on p16 status and underscores the differing prognoses associated with p16-positive and p16-negative cases.