Clinicopathologic Features and Survival Trends for Acinic Cell Carcinoma of the Major Salivary Glands: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Population Analysis

Prognostic factors for sublingual gland carcinoma: a population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database study

OBJECTIVE

To identify the clinical features and prognostic factors for sublingual gland carcinoma.

METHODS

This was a case-control study. Patients with surgically treated sublingual gland carcinoma were retrospectively included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database and divided into adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) and non-ACC groups. Primary outcome variables were disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS). Prognostic factors for each group were analyzed using Cox models.

RESULTS

We included 251 patients (115 men and 136 women). Compared with the non-ACC group, the ACC group had a larger average tumor size and received more adjuvant radiotherapy. In patients with ACC, the pathologic grade had an independent impact on DSS and OS, and patients who were undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy had worse DSS than those who were not receiving chemotherapy. In the non-ACC group, pathologic grade IV, lymph node metastasis, and adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with poor DSS and OS, and tumor extension predicted worsening DSS.

CONCLUSIONS

In sublingual gland carcinoma, the pathologic grade and adjuvant chemotherapy were the most important prognostic factors, whereas lymph node metastasis had a negative impact in non-ACC patients but not in ACC patients.

Acinic Cell Carcinoma in the 21st Century: A Population-Based Study from the SEER Database and Review of Recent Molecular Genetic Advances

BACKGROUND

Acinic cell carcinoma (AciCC) comprises 6-7% of all salivary gland neoplasms and is the second most common salivary gland malignancy in children. Like many salivary gland carcinomas, it is considered low grade but occasionally it behaves aggressively. Understanding the risk factors associated with recurrence, metastasis, and death is important to determine the counseling and management of individual patients. Older population-based studies are presumed to have been confounded by the misclassification of other neoplasms as AciCC, in particular secretory carcinoma and cystadenocarcinoma. Since diagnostic tools to reliably separate these entities have been available for over a decade, reevaluation of epidemiologic data limited to the 21st century should allow a better characterization of the clinicopathological characteristics of AciCC.

METHODS

Our study extracted data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database for the period 2000 to 2018. Cox regression model analysis was performed to identify risk factors independently affecting survival.

RESULTS

Data for 2226 patients with AciCC were extracted from the database. Most patients were females: 59%, and white: 80.5%, with a mean age at diagnosis of 51.2 (SD ± 18.7) years. Most cases (81%) were localized at presentation. Tumor size was less than 2 cm in 42%, 2-4 cm in 47%, and >4 cm in 11%. Low-grade tumors had 5-year survival > 90%, whereas high-grade tumors had survival < 50%. Of the patients with known lymph node status only 7.3% had nodal metastases. Distant metastases were documented in 1.1%, involving lungs 44%, bone 40%, liver 12%, and brain 4%. The most common treatment modality was surgery alone: 63.6% followed by surgery and adjuvant radiation: 33%. A few received chemotherapy (1.8%) or multimodality therapy (1.2%). The 5-year overall survival rate was 90.6% (95%CI 89.1-91.9), and disease-specific survival was 94.6% (95%CI 93.3-95.6). Multivariable cox regression analysis showed that undifferentiated (HR = 8.3) and poorly differentiated tumor grade (HR = 6.4), and metastasis (HR = 5.3) were the worst independent prognostic factors. Other poor risk factors included age > 50 (HR = 3.5) and tumor size > 4 cm (HR = 2.5).

CONCLUSIONS

In the US, AciCC is more common in middle age white females, and most tumors are less than 4 cm and localized at diagnosis. The most relevant negative prognostic factor was high tumor grade which was associated with higher hazard ratios for death than all other variables, including regional or distant metastases at presentation.

Survival outcomes, prognostic factors, and effect of adjuvant radiotherapy and prophylactic neck dissection in salivary acinic cell carcinoma: A prospective multicenter REFCOR study of 187 patients

BACKGROUND

Acinic cell carcinomas (AciCCs) are malignant tumours of the salivary glands. The aim of this work was to analyse data from the national REFCOR multicenter cohort (i) to investigate the prognostic factors influencing survival outcomes in AciCC, (ii) to assess the impact on survival of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) in patients treated for AciCC without high-grade transformation and (iii) to explore the prognostic impact of prophylactic neck dissection (ND) in patients treated for AciCC of the major salivary glands.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from all the patients treated for salivary AciCC between 2009 and 2020 were extracted from the REFCOR database. Survival outcomes and prognostic factors influencing Disease-Free Survival (DFS) and Overall Survival (OS) were investigated using univariate and multivariate analyses. Propensity score matching was used to assess the impact of postoperative RT and prophylactic ND on DFS.

RESULTS

A total of 187 patients were included. After a median follow-up of 53 months, their 5-year OS and DFS rates were 92.8% and 76.2%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, male sex, older age, higher T and N status, and high grade were independently associated with a worse DFS. In the subpopulation analysed after propensity score matching, patients with cN0 AciCC without high-grade transformation who were treated by surgery and RT did not have an improved DFS compared to patients who were treated by surgery alone (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.87, p = 0.8). Factors associated with nodal invasion were T3-T4 status and intermediate/high histological grade. After propensity score matching, prophylactic ND was associated with a trend toward a better DFS (HR = 0.46, p = 0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that (i) long-term follow-up (>5 years) should be considered in patients with AciCC, (ii) treatment by surgery alone could be an option in selected cN0 patients with AciCC without high-grade transformation and (iii) prophylactic ND may be considered preferentially in patients with T3-T4 status and/or intermediate/high histological grade.

Diagnosis of acinic cell carcinoma of the salivary gland on cytology specimens: Role of NOR-1 (NR4A3) immunohistochemistry

OBJECTIVES

Acinic cell carcinoma (AcCC) is often a challenging diagnosis on cytology. Recently, NOR-1 (NR4A3) has been demonstrated as a sensitive and specific marker for AcCC. Therefore, we conducted this study to evaluate NOR-1 expression in AcCC cytology specimens and to compare its reactivity in other salivary gland tumours (non-AcCC).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our database and selected cytology cases with available cell blocks, including 10 AcCC and 24 non-AcCC tumours (12 benign tumours and 12 malignant tumours). NOR-1 (1:50 dilution; SC393902 [H-7]; Santa Cruz Biotech) immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed on all cases.

RESULTS

All AcCC cases except two (2/10, 80%) showed positive nuclear staining of variable intensity for NOR-1, with the majority of cases (75%) demonstrating at least moderately intense nuclear expression. All non-AcCC cases were negative for NOR-1, demonstrating a specificity of 100%.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that NOR-1 IHC is sensitive and very specific on cytology specimens and is able to distinguish AcCC from its mimickers reliably and classify them appropriately for further management.

Differential diagnosis and treatment of salivary secretory carcinoma and acinic cell carcinoma

Secretory carcinoma (SC) and acinic cell carcinoma (AciCC) are two rare tumors originating in the salivary gland of the head and neck. Before the World Health Organization (WHO) classified SC as a new entity in 2017, the majority of SC cases were incorrectly diagnosed as AciCC. Indeed, they are similar in biological behaviors, clinical manifestations and histomorphological features. Especially, SC and zymogen granule-poor AciCC are difficult to differentiate, which brings a tough challenge in clinical diagnosis. This article provides an updated understanding of the differential diagnosis in SC and AciCC from two main perspectives: histopathology and molecular genetics. The targeted therapies for both tumors are also mentioned. It aims to give some hints in clinical diagnosis and treatment, in hopes that patients with adequate diagnosis could obtain the opportunityformore effective treatment.