Our objective was to examine the impact of elective neck dissection (END) on the prognosis of patients with cT2N0 maxillary sinus squamous cell carcinoma (MS-SCC) and to determine factors that predict the occurrence of occult metastasis in this patient population. A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the SEER database. Patients with cT2N0 MS-SCC were included in the study and divided into two groups: those who received END and those who did not. The impact of END on disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed using propensity score matching. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors for occult metastasis. A total of 180 patients were included in the study, with 40 cases receiving END. Following propensity score matching, patients treated with END and those without showed similar DSS and OS rates. Occult metastasis was observed in 9 patients, corresponding to a rate of 22.5%. High-grade tumors were independently associated with a higher risk of occult metastasis compared to low-grade tumors (hazard ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.17-2.00). cT2 MS-SCC carries an occult metastasis rate of 22.5%, with histologic grade being the primary determinant of occult metastasis. END does not confer a significant survival benefit in this patient population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the oncologic safety and quality of life associated with the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) as compared to elective neck dissection (END) in patients with cT1/2N0 maxillary squamous cell carcinoma.
METHODS: This study constituted a retrospective analysis of consecutively treated patients who underwent SLNB or END, with data collected prospectively. We analyzed the impact of the different neck procedures on regional control and disease-specific survival via the Cox model. Patients in both groups completed the University of Washington Quality of Life questionnaire.
RESULTS: We included a total of 130 patients, with 47 receiving SLNB. In all cases, the sentinel lymph node could be identified, and of these, 5 had a positive result, yielding a sensitivity of 83.3 %, a specificity of 100 %, a false negative rate of 16.7 %, and a negative predictive value of 97.6 %. The sensitivity, specificity, false negative rate, and negative predictive value of END in detecting occult metastasis were 64.3 %, 100 %, 35.7 %, and 93.2 %, respectively. In comparison to END after propensity score matching, SLNB exhibited no significant difference in its effects on regional control (p = 0.519, HR: 1.05, 95 % CI: 0.52-1.93) and disease-specific survival (p = 0.634, HR: 1.22, 95 % CI: 0.53-1.99). Patients in SLNB group showed significantly higher mean scores of shoulder and taste domains at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively compared to those in END group.
CONCLUSIONS: SLNB could act as a viable alternative to END in cT1/2N0 maxillary squamous cell carcinoma with comparable prognosis and better quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Maxillary sinus squamous cell carcinoma (MS-SCC) is an infrequent malignancy, and determining the optimal neck management for patients with cT3/4N0 MS-SCC remains a topic of ongoing debate. The purpose of this study was to compare the prognoses and quality of life outcomes of patients who underwent either elective neck dissection (END) or elective neck irradiation (ENI) for cT3/4N0 MS-SCC.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, we enrolled patients with surgically treated cT3/4N0 MS-SCC, and the impact of different neck management strategies on regional control and disease-specific survival was compared using propensity score matching. The effect of surgical intervention on quality of life was evaluated using the Mann-Whitney U test.
RESULTS: Of the 120 patients included, 36 underwent END. After propensity score matching, our analysis indicated that END did not lead to superior outcomes than ENI, as demonstrated by comparable rates of regional control (p = 0.990) and disease-specific survival (p = 0.999). However, in the 70 returned questionnaires, patients who underwent END reported higher scores in the domains of appearance, chewing, and speech than did patients who underwent ENI.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that while END and ENI contribute to similar prognoses, END yields superior functional outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: Optimal neck management remains unclear in head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (HNcSCC) with parotid metastasis. Our goal was to compare the impact of different cervical treatments on HNcSCC with parotid metastasis.
UNASSIGNED: Patients were retrospectively included. The primary outcome variables were regional control (RC) and disease-specific survival (DSS). The impacts of observation, elective neck irradiation (ENI), and elective neck dissection (END) were analyzed using the Cox model and presented as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
UNASSIGNED: In total, 268 patients were enrolled. In the Cox model for RC, compared with ENI, observation was associated with a significantly higher risk of regional recurrence (p = 0.001, HR = 2.50, 95%CI = 1.45-4.30). However, END showed a comparable influence on regional recurrence (p = 0.246, HR = 0.70, 95%CI = 0.38-1.28). In the Cox model for DSS, END demonstrated a similar HR of 0.62 (95%CI = 0.30-1.26) compared to ENI (p = 0.184). However, patients who underwent observation were associated with an additional nearly twofold risk of cancer-related mortality (HR = 2.85, 95%CI = 1.55-5.23). Subgroup analysis showed that ENI predicted comparable RC (p = 0.389) and DSS (p = 0.346) in patients with one or two metastatic parotid lymph nodes, but worse RC (p = 0.007) and DSS (p = 0.024) in patients with more than three positive lymph nodes.
UNASSIGNED: In HNcSCC with parotid metastasis, elective treatment of neck lymph nodes with END or ENI should always be performed.

Our objective is to assess the oncologic outcomes of observation, elective neck dissection (END), and elective neck irradiation (ENI) in the neck management of head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (HNcSCC) with parotid metastasis (P+) and to evaluate the quality of life (QoL) of patients who received END or ENI.
Patients with P+ HNcSCC were retrospectively enrolled. The impact of observation, END, and ENI on regional control (RC) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards model with presentation via hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). QoL was evaluated using the University of Washington Quality of Life questionnaire.
A total of 134 patients were included in our analysis. In the Cox model for RC, both END and ENI had decreased HRs of 0.27 (95% CI: 0.15-0.69) and 0.34 (95% CI: 0.18-0.86), respectively, in comparison with observation. In the Cox model for OS, both END (p = 0.001, HR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.10-0.72) and ENI (p = 0.006, HR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17-0.83) were superior to observation. In patients with three or more positive parotid lymph nodes, END resulted in significantly better RC (p < 0.001) and OS (p = 0.001) compared with ENI. The two groups were found to be comparable in all 12 domains of the University of Washington Quality of Life questionnaire.
In the neck management of P+ HNcSCC, observation is not recommended. END is the preferred option, but ENI is an alternative method without compromise to survival or QoL, except in cases with three or more metastatic parotid lymph nodes.

The neck control strategies of early-stage oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) patients with clinical node-negative neck remain uncertain. These patients could be benefit from elective neck dissection (END) alongside primary tumor excision; but current evidence on END versus observation for OSCC of stage I only is not yet analyzed collectively in detail. Herein, this short communication aimed to evaluate the neck control strategies of stage I OSCC, mainly END versus observation. A total of 740 patients with stage I OSCC, comprising 434 underwent END and 306 received observation, were identified from literature. The results showed that stage I OSCC patients would not be benefit from END based on the analysis of neck nodal recurrence and overall survival. An ideal strategy would likely be to avoid neck dissection for stage I OSCC patients with N0 neck. Immune checkpoint therapy is such a potential strategy, which aims at eliciting potent antitumor immune responses within lymph nodes hold promise for treating patients with early-stage OSCC and may prove more efficacious than lymphadenectomy in a variety of scenarios. Consequently, neck dissection for stage I OSCC could be approached with caution, particularly in patients receiving immune checkpoint therapy.

The neck management of clinical-nodal negative (cN0) oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) remains controversial. Elective neck dissection (END) and observation are the main strategies, but it is still not clear who could benefit the most from END. The purpose of this study was to clarify the potential clinical factors that affect the therapeutic value of END and to explore the actual characteristics associated with benefit from END.
Patients with cN0 OSCC were identified in the SEER database from 2000 to 2019. 5-year Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were analyzed using the Kaplan‒Meier method, and the hazard ratios (HRs) for survival were estimated using the Cox regression model. Multiple subgroup analyses of DSS and OS among different factors, comparing END and No END, were performed.
A total of 17,019 patients with cN0 OSCC were included. The basic survival analysis and Cox regression model showed that END increased the probability of 5-year DSS and OS and was an independent prognostic factor. However, among patients who underwent only primary tumor surgery, no significant differences were found between the END and No END groups in 5-year DSS (P = 0. 585) and OS (P = 0.465). Further subgroup analysis showed that primary sites and T stage, but not other factors, might influence the benefit of END. Significant differences were found for T1 (P < 0.001 for OS) and T2 (P = 0.001 for DSS and < 0.001 for OS) tongue squamous cell carcinoma (TSCC) but not for other primary tumor sites.
This large-scale retrospective population-based cohort study suggests that not all patients with cN0 OSCC could benefit from END. Patients with cN0 TSCC are recommended to undergo END, especially with early-stage tumors.

BACKGROUND: The current NCCN guidelines recommend considering elective neck dissection (END) for early-stage oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC) with a depth of invasion (DOI) exceeding 3 mm. However, this DOI threshold, determined by evaluating the occult lymph node metastatic rate, lacks robust supporting evidence regarding its impact on patient outcomes. In this nationwide study, we sought to explore the specific indications for END in patients diagnosed with OCSCC at stage cT2N0M0, as defined by the AJCC Eighth Edition staging criteria.
METHODS: We examined 4723 patients with cT2N0M0 OCSCC, of which 3744 underwent END and 979 were monitored through neck observation (NO).
RESULTS: Patients who underwent END had better 5-year outcomes compared to those in the NO group. The END group had higher rates of neck control (95% vs. 84%, p < 0.0001), disease-specific survival (DSS; 87% vs. 84%, p = 0.0259), and overall survival (OS; 79% vs. 73%, p = 0.0002). Multivariable analysis identified NO, DOI ≥5.0 mm, and moderate-to-poor tumor differentiation as independent risk factors for 5-year neck control, DSS, and OS. Based on these prognostic variables, three distinct outcome subgroups were identified within the NO group. These included a low-risk subgroup (DOI <5 mm plus well-differentiated tumor), an intermediate-risk subgroup (DOI ≥5.0 mm or moderately differentiated tumor), and a high-risk subgroup (poorly differentiated tumor or DOI ≥5.0 mm plus moderately differentiated tumor). Notably, the 5-year survival outcomes (neck control/DSS/OS) for the low-risk subgroup within the NO group (97%/95%/85%, n = 251) were not inferior to those of the END group (95%/87%/79%).
CONCLUSIONS: By implementing risk stratification within the NO group, we found that 26% (251/979) of low-risk patients achieved outcomes similar to those in the END group. Therefore, when making decisions regarding the implementation of END in patients with cT2N0M0 OCSCC, factors such as DOI and tumor differentiation should be taken into account.

The aim of this study was to determine the significance of elective neck dissection (END) for patients of different ages with T2N0M0 oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and sought to analyze the reasons behind it and its value for clinical guidance.
This study enrolled 391 patients with T2N0M0 OSCC who were surgically treated in our hospital and were divided into young-, moderate-, and advanced-age groups according to our previous study. The Chi-square test and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed for statistical analysis.
Compared with moderate- and advanced-age patients, young patients with T2N0M0 OSCC had higher lymph node metastasis rates and lymph node ratios. Therefore, END significantly improved the recurrence (p = 0.001) and survival (p = 0.001) for young patients, but not for moderate-age patients. Advanced-age patients even benefit from watchful waiting. END significantly improved recurrence and survival in young patients with smoking or alcohol consumption habits.
END improved the prognosis of young patients, and it was related to their higher metastasis rate. However, advanced-age patients benefited from the wait-and-see policy. END is essential for the young patients with smoking or drinking habit, it is also highly recommended for nonsmokers and nondrinkers.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of cervical lymph nodes in N0M0 maxillary sinus squamous cell carcinoma (MSSCC) remains a subject of debate. This study aimed to investigate the impact of elective neck dissection (END) on the prognosis of N0M0 MSSCC patients and explore potential prognostic factors.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to minimize bias between the END and non-END groups. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify prognostic factors, and subgroup analyses were conducted based on patient characteristics. Furthermore, the optimal number of lymph nodes in END was determined using maximally selected test statistics.
RESULTS: A total of 777 N0M0 MSSCC patients were included in the study. After PSM, patients who underwent END demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) compared to those who did not undergo END (p < 0.05). Subgroup analyses revealed a favorable prognosis for patients receiving radiotherapy and END, with a hazard ratio of 0.729 (95% CI: 0.549-0.967; p = 0.029) for OS. Furthermore, patients with a lymph node count greater than 5 in END had significantly better OS and CSS compared to those with 5 or fewer lymph nodes (p = 0.013, p = 0.018, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that END provides a survival benefit for N0M0 MSSCC patients. Additionally, a lymph node count greater than 5 in END is associated with improved staging accuracy and better prognosis. Prospective research is needed to validate these findings and inform clinical decision-making for N0M0 MSSCC patients.