AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2692-9562/057
1 Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery Madigan Army Medical Center Tacoma, WA.
2 Facial Plastic Surgery Associates Fort Worth, Texas.
3 University of Manitoba Manitoba, Canada.
4 Penn State Hershey Medical Center Dept Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery Hershey, PA.
*Corresponding Author: Yadranko Ducic, Facial Plastic Surgery Associates 923 Pennsylvania Ave, Ste 100 Fort Worth, TX, 76104.
Citation: Anne E. Gunter, Aurora G. Vincent, Abdul Rahman Alenezi, Weitao Wang, Tom Shokri. et all (2022) False-Positive Fine Needle Aspiration in the Initial Management of Squamous cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology 4(4); DOI: 10.31579/2692-9562/057
Copyright: © 2022 Yadranko Ducic. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
Received: 19 May 2022 | Accepted: 01 September 2022 | Published: 12 September 2022
Keywords: head and neck cancer; squamous cell carcinoma; cancer unknown primary
Objective
There is considerable variability in the work-up and management of head and neck squamous cell of unknown primary (HNSCCUP). In some cases, a multimodality treatment plan is devised and carried out based on a cytopathologic diagnosis achieved with fine needle aspiration (FNA). While FNA has historically been reported to be reliable, a false-positive result could lead to devastating treatment in a patient without malignancy. Thus, we sought to elucidate the true false-positive rate of FNA and provide a safe algorigthm for the workup of HNSCCUP.
Methods
We performed a retrospective chart review of patients treated by the senior author (Y.D.) between 1998 and 2019 for a neck mass concerning for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) on fine needle aspiration (FNA) who did not have localized primary disease after imaging and surgical investigations of the upper aerodigestive tract.
Results
89 patients with HNSCCUP underwent neck dissection, and 75 (84%) were confirmed to have SCC. 14 (16%) patients, however, had no evidence of malignancy on histopathology of the neck contents, and none of these patients developed cancer after one year of follow-up.
Conclusion
FNA is a reliable tool in the diagnosis of adult neck masses, but it carries a small yet significant false-positive rate for malignancy. In the study herein, we demonstrate that 16% undergoing extensive work-up for presumed HNSCCUP will have benign pathology following neck dissection. Thus, it is important for surgeons to confirm the diagnosis histologically before committing patients to toxic, multimodality cancer therapies.
A neck mass presenting in an adult warrants special attention considering the most common etiology is malignancy [1]. Initial evaluation should begin with a thorough history and physical, indirect laryngoscopy, and possible biopsy if a concerning lesion in the upper aerodigestive tract is identified. Unless there is a strong suspicion for lymphoma, fine needle aspiration (FNA) is often performed to obtain a cytopathologic diagnosis. When FNA is concerning for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), but no primary site is readily identified, then the patient is considered to have head and neck squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary (HNSCCUP).
HNSCCUP is uncommon and only accounts for 3-5% of cancers of the head and neck [2-4], but there is no standardized approach to the management of the newly diagnosed patient with HNSCCUP. Considerable heterogeneity exists in the literature regarding optimal identification of the primary and treatment. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends performing either a computed tomography (CT) scan with contrast, or positron-emission tomography (PET) scan combined with CT to aid in identification of a primary tumor. 5 If the primary tumor remains elusive following appropriate imaging and panendoscopy, some surgeons advocate proceeding with bilateral palatine tonsillectomy with or without lingual tonsillectomy, as 80-90% of unknown primaries are eventually localized to the oropharynx [4,6].
Although these more invasive techniques can improve detection of the primary tumor, they are often performed prior to treatment of the neck. Furthermore, some will proceed with primary radiation to the neck after imaging, exam under anesthesia, directed biopsies, and tonsillectomy are negative, assuming the case is truly HNSCCUP.
FNA is regarded as accurate and reliable when it comes to diagnosis of malignancy in metastatic SCC; it is reported to have a positive predictive value of 96% in a recent meta-analysis [7]. However, a false-positive FNA masquerading as HNSCCUP is possibly more frequent than anticipated by most surgeons and could lead to treatment of patients who don’t have cancer with toxic cancer therapies. Herein, we review our experience with false-positive FNAs of neck masses and present a treatment algorithm to prevent radiation and other cancer therapies in patients without malignancy.
We performed a retrospective review of patients treated by the senior author (YD) between 1998 and 2019 for a neck mass, with initial FNA demonstrating SCC but no evidence of primary or distant disease on exam with laryngoscopy, positron-emission tomography (PET), or panendoscopy with tonsillectomy. We excluded patients who were lost to follow-up before one year. Approval for our study was granted by the John Peter Smith Hospital institutional review board, Fort Worth, TX. Statistical analysis was completed in Graph Pad Prism, version 8 (San Diego, CA).
It has been standard in our practice to approach adult neck masses concerning for carcinoma as follows: when there is an obvious primary site, it undergoes biopsy followed by FNA of the neck mass, and a treatment plan is then developed based on those results. In the case of a neck mass without an obvious primary lesion on physical exam or flexible laryngoscopy and without a history of skin cancer, then we perform FNA of the neck mass. If FNA is concerning for SCC, imaging is performed to evaluate for a primary site of disease and any distant metastases. Commonly, imaging will include a computed tomography (CT) scan of the neck and chest or a positron emission tomography (PET) scan of the entire body. Following, the patient is scheduled for operative panendoscopy with biopsy of any primary site suspicious on imaging or directed biopsies and tonsillectomy, if no primary site is found and confirmed. If a primary is still not identified, then we proceed with a neck dissection for both therapeutic and diagnostic reasons. If the initial neck mass is in level 2, 3, or 4, then the initial neck dissection includes levels 2-5. If the initial mass in in level 1, then a supraomohyoid (levels 1-3) neck dissection is performed. Our treatment algorithm is depicted in Figure 1. If pathologic evaluation of the neck contents confirms SCC, we consider performing lingual tonsillectomy to continue the search for the primary site. Then, we proceed with multimodality cancer therapy including radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy as appropriate. If, however, the neck contents do not demonstrate malignancy on histologic examination, then we follow patients for at least one year both clinically and with serial imaging of the neck to include repeat CT scans or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
We identified 89 patients in the study period who met inclusion criteria for our study; all had a neck mass with concern for SCC on FNA, but no evidence of primary or distantly-metastatic disease on PET (if performed), and no primary disease pathologically identified after panendoscopy with tonsillectomy and directed biopsies. Neck dissection was performed in all patients, and SCC was confirmed in 75 (84%) patients, all of whom subsequently underwent further therapy. Fourteen patients (16%) did not have invasive SCC on final pathologic examination after neck dissection and underwent no further treatment (Figure 2). Of these, 12 (86%) had a cystic neck mass on presentation, while 2 (14%) had a solid mass. None of these fourteen patients had evidence of disease based on serial imaging and clinical exam at one-year follow-up. Given these results, the positive predictive value of FNA in our patient population is 84.27%.
Figure 1: Cases of FNA+ neck masses with confirmed malignancy in the neck (unknown primary status) and with a reversal of the diagnosis after neck dissection. 16% of cases initially diagnosed with SCC in the neck based on FNA were found to have no malignancy after neck dissection. FNA: fine needle aspiration. SCC: squamous cell carcinoma.
Our study demonstrates that FNA diagnosis of adult neck masses, while often reliable and correct, can nonetheless be falsely suggestive of carcinoma in an important subset of patients. Thus, we advocate obtaining tissue for histologic confirmation of disease before proceeding with RT or chemotherapy. As in all aspects of medicine, each treatment step should be pursued after weight the risks and benefits to the patient. It would be devastating to expose a patient unnecessarily to toxic cancer treatments should he or she not have cancer. It would also be unfortunate to expose a patient to anesthesia and the risks of surgery, if non-invasive methods can better guide diagnosis. It is with these considerations in mind that we’ve adhered to our algorithm presented in Figure 1.
Figure 2: Algorithm for workup of an adult neck mass. Importantly, non-surgical interventions for cancer (radiotherapy, chemotherapy) should be delayed until the diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) initially suggested by fine needle aspiration (FNA) has been confirmed histologically. CT: computed tomography. PET: positron-emission tomography.
The initial evaluation of an adult neck mass is widely-accepted to include a comprehensive history and physical exam and, if neoplasm is considered, FNA. We advocate imaging of the neck and distant sites before proceeding to invasive procedures and surgery. Importantly, if PET is pursued, it should precede examination under anesthesia with directed biopsies to avoid a falsely-positive image.
In cases in which a histologic diagnosis cannot be confirmed from the primary site of disease, as in the case of HNSCCUP, excisional biopsy of the neck mass is tempting, but it should be avoided. Excisional biopsy is associated with increased rates of regional recurrence and distant metastasis, possibly due to tumor spillage [8]. Thus, a comprehensive, oncologically-sound neck dissection is necessary to perform when a primary site cannot be identified. Such a neck dissection can be both diagnostic and therapeutic; in early stage HNSCCUP, single modality treatment of the neck, such as surgical excision or RT alone, is acceptable.4 Further, patients who do go on to require RT to neck contents may be able to receive a lower dose after resection of disease, thus sparing them the toxicities of high-dose treatment.
Next, we also advocate for neck dissection before lingual tonsillectomy, as we feel the recovery from palatine tonsillectomy and lingual tonsillectomy, as would be performed in a comprehensive attempt to identify a primary site of malignancy, is particularly morbid, and would also be devastating in a patient later found to not have cancer in the neck.
The authors have no disclosures. The work herein does not necessarily represent the views of the United States Army or Department of Defense.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
