To compare local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) in early oral cavity cancer (OCC) patients with positive/close frozen section (FS) cleared with further resection (R1 to R0) or positive FS not cleared (R1) to those with negative margins on initial FS analysis (R0).
Data Sources
PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane.
Review Methods
We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) for reporting in our study. Only English-language articles that included patients with OCC and local recurrence (LR) comparisons between R0 and initially R1 to final R0 or final R1 groups were included. We requested the raw data from the corresponding authors of eligible studies and performed an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of LRFS outcomes across groups.
Results
Pooled LRFS data from 8 studies showed that patients in the R1 to R0 group had worse LRFS compared to the R0 group (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.897, P < .001). Patients in the R1 group were also found to have worse LRFS compared to the R0 group (HR = 3.795, P < .001). When compared to final R1 group, the initially R1 to final R0 only showed a trend toward better LRFS.
Conclusion
Margin revision of initially positive margins to “clear” based on FS guidance does not equate to an initially negative margin and does not significantly improve local control. These findings call into question the effectiveness of the current methodology of intraoperative FS in OCC resections and call for a prospective study to determine what system of resected specimen analysis best predicts completeness of resection.
SiegelRLMillerKDJemalA. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:7-30.
2.
SuttonDNBrownJSRogersSNVaughanEDWoolgarJA. The prognostic implications of the surgical margin in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;32:30-34.
3.
LoreeTRStrongEW. Significance of positive margins in oral cavity squamous carcinoma. Am J Surg. 1990;160:410-414.
4.
LooserKGShahJPStrongEW. The significance of “positive” margins in surgically resected epidermoid carcinomas. Head Neck Surg. 1978;1:107-111.
5.
PathakKANasonRWPennerCVialletNRSutherlandDKerrPD. Impact of use of frozen section assessment of operative margins on survival in oral cancer. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107:235-239.
6.
MaxwellJHThompsonLDBrandwein-GenslerMSet al. Early oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma: sampling of margins from tumor bed and worse local control. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;141:1104-1110.
7.
BinahmedANasonRWAbdohAA. The clinical significance of the positive surgical margin in oral cancer. Oral Oncol. 2007;43:780-784.
8.
NasonRWBinahmedAPathakKAAbdohAASandorGK. What is the adequate margin of surgical resection in oral cancer?Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107:625-629.
9.
PriyaSRD’CruzAKPaiPS. Cut margins and disease control in oral cancers. J Cancer Res Ther. 2012;8:74-79.
10.
VarvaresMAPotiSKenyonBChristopherKWalkerRJ. Surgical margins and primary site resection in achieving local control in oral cancer resections. Laryngoscope. 2015;125:2298-2307.
11.
BuchakjianMRTascheKKRobinsonRAPagedarNASperrySM. Association of main specimen and tumor bed margin status with local recurrence and survival in oral cancer surgery. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;142:1191-1198.
EttlTEl-GindiAHautmannMet al. Positive frozen section margins predict local recurrence in R0-resected squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Oral Oncol. 2016;55:17-23.
14.
SzewczykMGolusinskiWPazdrowskiJMasternakMSharmaNGolusinskiP. Positive fresh frozen section margins as an adverse independent prognostic factor for local recurrence in oral cancer patients. Laryngoscope. 2018;128:1093-1098.
15.
PatelRSGoldsteinDPGuillemaudJet al. Impact of positive frozen section microscopic tumor cut-through revised to negative on oral carcinoma control and survival rates. Head Neck. 2010;32:1444-1451.
16.
GuillemaudJPPatelRSGoldsteinDPHigginsKMEnepekidesDJ. Prognostic impact of intraoperative microscopic cut-through on frozen section in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;39:370-377.
17.
MeierJDOliverDAVarvaresMA. Surgical margin determination in head and neck oncology: current clinical practice. The results of an International American Head and Neck Society Member Survey. Head Neck. 2005;27:952-958.
18.
OrdRAAisnerS. Accuracy of frozen sections in assessing margins in oral cancer resection. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;55:663-671.
19.
SharmaSMPrasadBRPushparajSPoojaryD. Accuracy of intraoperative frozensection in assessing margins in oral cancer resection. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2009;8:357-361.
20.
PrabhuAVSturgisCDLaiCet al. Improving margin revision: characterization of tumor bed margins in early oral tongue cancer. Oral Oncol. 2017;75:184-188.
21.
DiNardoLJLinJKarageorgeLSPowersCN. Accuracy, utility, and cost of frozen section margins in head and neck cancer surgery. Laryngoscope. 2000;110:1773-1776.
22.
BlackCMarottiJZarovnayaEPaydarfarJ. Critical evaluation of frozen section margins in head and neck cancer resections. Cancer. 2006;107:2792-2800.
23.
AmitMNa’AraSLeider-TrejoLet al. Improving the rate of negative margins after surgery for oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective randomized controlled study. Head Neck. 2016;38:E1803-E1809.
24.
YahalomRDobriyanAVeredMTalmiYPTeicherSBedrinL. A prospective study of surgical margin status in oral squamous cell carcinoma: a preliminary report. J Surg Oncol. 2008;98:572-578.
25.
ChangAMKimSWDuvvuriUet al. Early squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue: comparing margins obtained from the glossectomy specimen to margins from the tumor bed. Oral Oncol. 2013;49:1077-1082.
26.
MairMNairDNairSet al. Intraoperative gross examination vs frozen section for achievement of adequate margin in oral cancer surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017;123:544-549.
27.
StewartLAClarkeMRoversMet al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD statement. JAMA. 2015;313:1657-1665.
28.
HowickJChalmersIGlasziouPet al. The 2011 Oxford CEBM levels of evidence (introductory document). 2011. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653. Accessed April 23, 2018.
29.
BackesCBierHKnopfA. Therapeutic implications of tumor free margins in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Oncotarget. 2017;8:84320-84328.
30.
Brandwein-GenslerMTeixeiraMSLewisCMet al. Oral squamous cell carcinoma: histologic risk assessment, but not margin status, is strongly predictive of local disease-free and overall survival. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:167-178.
31.
TarabichiOBulbulMGKanumuriVVet al. Utility of intraoral ultrasound in managing oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma: systematic review. Laryngoscope. 2019;129:662-670.
32.
WuCGleysteenJTeraphongphomNTLiYRosenthalE. In-vivo optical imaging in head and neck oncology: basic principles, clinical applications and future directions. Int J Oral Sci. 2018;10:10.
33.
LiaoCTChangJTWangHMet al. Analysis of risk factors of predictive local tumor control in oral cavity cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:915-922.
34.
TascheKKBuchakjianMRPagedarNASperrySM. Definition of “close margin” in oral cancer surgery and association of margin distance with local recurrence rate. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;143:1166-1172.
35.
AndersonCRSissonKMoncrieffM. A meta-analysis of margin size and local recurrence in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol. 2015;51:464-469.
36.
RemsenKALucenteFEBillerHF. Reliability of frozen section diagnosis in head and neck neoplasms. Laryngoscope. 1984;94:519-524.
37.
KerawalaCJOngTK. Relocating the site of frozen sections—is there room for improvement?Head Neck. 2001;23:230-232.
38.
ByersRMBlandKIBorlaseBLunaM. The prognostic and therapeutic value of frozen section determinations in the surgical treatment of squamous carcinoma of the head and neck. Am J Surg. 1978;136:525-528.
39.
SchollPByersRMBatsakisJGWolfPSantiniH. Microscopic cut-through of cancer in the surgical treatment of squamous carcinoma of the tongue: prognostic and therapeutic implications. Am J Surg. 1986;152:354-360.
40.
GokavarapuSChandrasekhara RaoLMPatnaikSCParvataneniNRajuKVChanderR. Prognostic value of frozen section in T1, T2 carcinoma of oral cavity. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;67(suppl 1):86-90.
41.
GokavarapuSRaoLMMahajanMParvataneniNRajuKVChanderR. Revision of margins under frozen section in oral cancer: a retrospective study of involved margins in pT1 and pT2 oral cancers. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53:875-879.
