Table 3.
Correlation between effective methods and patient’s conditions
| Age | 30–39 | 40–49 | 50–59 | 60–69 | 70–80 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | PVR (1.34), AUS1 (230.3) | AUS2 (138.2), FWHM (65.7) | AUS1 (233) | FWHM (66.3) | AUS1 (236), FWHM (60.7) |
| Site | Tongue | Mucosa | Gum | Palate | Pyriform sinus |
| Method | AUS1 (242.6) | PVR (1.45) | AUS1 (219.2), AUS2 (139.6) | PVR (1.41) | AUS2 (126) |
| T | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |
| Method | PVR (1.36), AUS1 (233.1) | AUS1 (247.5) | PVR (1.54), FWHM (66.3) | AUS2 (139.5) | |
| N | N0 | N2 | |||
| Method | PVR (1.46) | AUS1 (246.5) |
Number in parentheses is optimal cut-off point of each effect method under different condition
T The size or direct extent of the primary tumor, T1, T2, T3, and T4 The size and/or extension of the primary tumor, N The degree of spread to regional lymph nodes. N0 The tumor cells absent from regional lymph nodes, N1 The regional lymph node metastasis present, N2 The tumor spreads to an extent between N1 and N3, N3 The tumor spreads to more distant or numerous regional lymph nodes