Advertisement

Histomorphometric Study to Compare Histological Changes Between Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Apparently Normal Adjacent Oral Mucosa

  • Deepa V. BabjiEmail author
  • Alka D. Kale
  • Seema R. Hallikerimath
  • Vijayalakshmi S. Kotrashetti
Original Article

Abstract

Despite the advances in surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy the annual death for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is rising rapidly. The carcinoma has propensity to develop in a field of cancerization. Clinically may it be apparently normal mucosa (ANM) adjacent to squamous cell carcinoma which harbours certain discrete molecular alteration which ultimately reflects in cellular morphology. Hence the aim of the study is to assess histomorphometric changes in ANM adjacent to OSCC. A prospective study was done on 30 each of histologically diagnosed cases OSCC, ANM at least 1 cm away from OSCC, and normal oral mucosa (NOM). Cellular and nuclear morphometric measurements were assessed on hematoxylin and eosin sections using image analysis software. Statistical analysis was done using analysis of variance test and Tukey’s post hoc test. The present study showed significant changes in cellular and nuclear area in superficial and invasive island of OSCC compared to ANM. The basal cells of ANM showed significant decrease in cellular and nuclear areas and nuclear cytoplasmic ratio when compared to NOM. Histomorphometry definitely can differentiate OSCC form ANM and NOM. The basal cells of ANM showed significant alterations in cellular area, nuclear area and nuclear cytoplasmic area when compared to NOM suggesting change in the field and have high risk of malignant transformation. These parameters can be used as indicator of field cancerization.

Keywords

Oral squamous cell carcinoma Apparently normal mucosa 1 cm away from squamous cell carcinoma Normal oral mucosa Histomorphometry 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am thankful to Dr. R. B. Patil Director and Dr Hallikerimath Oral oncologist Karnataka Cancer Therapy and Research Institute Navnagar Hubli. Late Dr. Sandeep Madhwapati Belgaum Cancer Hospital, Dr. Ravi Chikkodi, General pathologist. Anjaneya Laboratory for providing me samples. Special thanks to Mr. Mallapur for helping me frame the required statistical analysis for this study. Dr. Punnya V Angadi, Reader Deptartment of Oral Pathology, KLE’s VK Institute of dental sciences, Belgaum for helping and encouraging for conduct of the study.

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2012/pdfs/pr210_E.pdf. Indian cancer statistics, a model to be followed. World health organization
  2. 2.
    Wong DTW, Todd R, Tsuji T, Donoff RB (1996) Molecular biology of human oral cancer. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 7:319–328PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Neville BW, Damm DD, Allen CM, Bouquot JF (2002) Oral and Maxillofacial pathology, 2nd edn. Saunders Publications, Elsevier, Missouri, p 409 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ram H, Sarkar J, Kumar H, Konwar R, Bhatt ML, Mohammad S (2011) Oral cancer: risk factors and molecular pathogenesis. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 10:132–137PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thomson PJ (2002) Field change and oral cancer: new evidence for widespread carcinogenesis? Int J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 31:262–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Braakhuis BJ, Tabor MP, Kummer JA, Leemans CA, Brakenhoff RH (2003) A genetic explanation of slaughter’s concept of field cancerization: evidence and clinical implications. Cancer Res 63:1727–1730PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cankovic M, Ilic MP, Vuckovic N, Bokor-Bratic M (2013) The histological characteristics of clinically normal mucosa adjacent to oral cancer. J Cancer Res Ther 9:240–244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ogden GR, Lanne EB, Hopwood DV, Chisholm DM (1993) Evidence for field change in oral cancer based on cytokeratin expression. Br J Cancer 67:1324–1330PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ogden GR, Cowpe JG, Green MW (1991) Detection of field change in oral cancer exfoliative cytologic study. Cancer 68:1611–1615PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pindborg JJ, Reibel J, Holmstrup P (1985) Subjectivity in evaluating oral epithelial dysplasia, carcinoma in situ and initial carcinoma. J Oral Pathol Med 14(9):698–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meiejer GA, Belien JA, Van Diest PJ, Baak JP (1997) Image analysis of clinical pathology. J Clin Pathol 50:365–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shabana AH, el-Labban NG, Lee KW (1987) Morphometric analysis of basal cell layer in oral premalignant white lesions and squamous cell carcinoma. Clin Pathol 40:454–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ogden GR, Cowpe JG, Green MW, Chisholm (1990) Evidence for field change in oral cancer. Br J oral Maxillofac surg 28:390–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ramesh T, Mendis BR, Ratnatung N, Thattil RO (1999) Diagnosis of oral premalignant and malignant lesion using cytomorphometry. Odontostomatol Trop 85:23–27Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Welkoborsky H-J, Mann WJ, Glukmann JL, Freue JE (1993) Comparison of quantitative DNA measurements and cytomorphology in squamous cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract with and without lymph node metastasis. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 102:52–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ramesh T, Mendis BR, Ratnatunga N, Thattil RO (1999) The effect of tobacco smoking and betel chewing with tobacco on buccal mucosa: cytomorphometric analysis. Pathol Med 28:385–388Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Imtiaz. Histological evaluation of mucosa adjacent to primary lesion of oral squamous cell carcinoma to evaluate the possibility of field cancerisation. Dissertation submitted to Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences. http://119.82.96.197/gsdl/index/assoc/dir/doc.pdf
  18. 18.
    Slaughter DP, Southwick HW, Smejkal W (1953) Field cancerization in oral stratified squamous epithelium clinical implications of multicentric origin. Cancer 6:963–968PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Oijen MG, Slootweg PJ (2000) Oral field cancerization: carcinogen-induced independent events or micrometastic deposits? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:249–256PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Califano J, Van der Riet P, Westra W, Nawroz H, Piantadosi S et al (1996) Genetic progression model for head and neck cancer: implications for field cancerization. Cancer Res 56:2488–2492PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bedi GC, Wettra WH, Gabrielson E, Koch W, Sidransky D et al (1996) Multiple head and neck tumors: evidence for common clonal origin. Cancer Res 56:2484–2487PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Partridge MG, Pateromichelakis S, Philips E, Langdon J et al (1997) Field cancerization of oral cavity: comparison of the spectrum of molecular alterations in cases presenting with both dysplastic and malignant lesions. Oral Oncol 33:332–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cianfriglia F, Di Gregorio DA, Manieri A (1999) Multiple primary tumours in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 35:157–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nur M, Cowpe JG, Rita W (2001) Cytomorphologic analysis of papanocolaou stained smears collected from floor of the mouth mucosa in patients with or without malignancy. Turk J Med Sci 31:225–228Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Eveson JW, MacDonald DG (1981) Hamster tongue carcinogenesis II. Quantitative morphologic aspects of preneoplastic epithelium. J Oral Pathol 10:332–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Suneet K, Monica CS (2010) Cytomorphological analysis of keratinocytes in oral smears from tobacco users and oral squamous cell carcinoma lesions—a histochemical approach. Int J Oral Sci 2:45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    White FH, Gohari K (1982) Cellular and nuclear volumetric alterations during differentiation of normal hamster cheek pouch epithelium. Arch Dermatol Res 273:307–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yen A, Pardee AB (1979) Role of nuclear size in cell growth initiation. Science 204:315–1317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Melissa R, Brian M, Max D (2006) Infrared micro-spectroscopy of human cells: causes for the spectral variance of oral mucosa (buccal) cells. Vib Spectrosc 42:9–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kumar, Robins, Cotran (2003) Pathologic basics of diseases, 7th edn. Saunders Publishers, Philadelphia, p 3Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jin Y, Yang LJ, White FH (1995) Preliminary assessment of the epithelial nuclear cytoplasmic ratio and nuclear volume density in human palatal lesions. J Oral Pathol Med 24:261–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Morten B, Albrecht R (1983) Discrimination of various epithelia by simple morphometric evaluation of the basal cell layer. A light microscopic analysis of pseudostratified, metaplastic and dysplastic nasal epithelium in nickel workers. Virchows Arch B Cell Pathol Incl Mol Pathol 42:173–184Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mayer M, Shroed HE (1975) A quantitative electron microscopic analysis of the keratinizing of normal human hard palate. Cell Tissue Res 158:177–203Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bernimoulin JP, Shroed HE (1977) Quantitative electron microscopic analysis of the keratinizing of normal human alveolar mucosa. Cell Tissue Res 180:383–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deepa V. Babji
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alka D. Kale
    • 2
  • Seema R. Hallikerimath
    • 2
  • Vijayalakshmi S. Kotrashetti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Oral Pathology and MicrobiologyMaratha Mandal’s NGH Institute of Dental SciencesBelgaumIndia
  2. 2.Department of Oral Pathology and MicrobiologyKLE VK Institute of Dental SciencesBelgaumIndia

Personalised recommendations