Table 1. Marker expression and fluorescence intensity in oral epithelium biopsies.
A | ||||||||||
Diagnosis | CDH1$ | EMP1$ | 5T4$ | CDH2$ | CD44$ | |||||
+ve | -ve | +ve | -ve | +ve | -ve | +ve | -ve | +ve | -ve | |
Normal Tissue | 12 | 0 | 11 | 1 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 4 | 8 |
FEP | 6 | 4 | 8 | 2 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 1 | 9 |
LGD | 0 | 20 | 5 | 15 | 12 | 8 | 2 | 18 | 5 | 15 |
HGD | 0 | 16 | 2 | 14 | 4 | 12 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 11 |
T1 OSCC | 1 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 4 |
T4 OSCC | 1 | 9 | 1 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 10 |
LGD-M | 6 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 9 | 2 | 7 |
HGD-M | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 7 |
T1 OSCC-M | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 4 |
B | ||||||||||
Diagnosis |
CDH1 Mean FI| |
EMP1 Mean FI| |
5T4 Mean FI| |
CDH2 Mean FI| |
CDH1 vs EMP1* | CDH1 vs 5T4* | CDH1 vs CDH2* | EMP1 vs 5T4* | EMP1 vs CDH2* |
5T4 vs CDH2* |
NT | 53.1 (1.5/2.8) | 55.5 (6.9/13.5) | 42.9 (7.2/14.2) | 6.3 (5.3/10.3) | ns | ns | 0.0006 | ns | 0.0002 | 0.0003 |
FEP | 30.4 (6.4/6.4) | 45.7 (9.8/12.8) | 46.2 (7.0/9.1) | 4.6 (3.6/6.7) | ns | ns | ns | ns | 0.017 | 0.004 |
LGD | 0 | 11.2 (4.5/8.5) | 31.3 (6.5/12.4) | 2.8 (2.8/5.3) | ns | 0.0001 | ns | 0.021 | ns | 0.001 |
HGD | 0 | 7.4 (5.2/9.8) | 12.2 (5.5/10.5) | 11.6 (5.4/10.2) | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
T1 OSCC | 8.7 (8.7/15.2) | 0 | 26.0 (12.2/21.4) | 0 | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
T4 OSCC | 6.5 (6.5/12.1) | 4.4 (4.4/8.3) | 30.3 (10.9/20.2) | 37.1 (8.7/16.2) | ns | ns | 0.041 | ns | 0.034 | ns |
$Cell surface expression of markers shown.
|Standard error of the mean/Confidence Interval.
*One-Way ANOVA analysis (p-value); FI–relative fluorescence intensity; SEM–standard error of the mean; CI– 95% confidence interval; NT- normal tissue; FEP–fibroepithelial polyp; LGD–low grade dysplasia; HGD–high grade dysplasia; T1 OSCC–T1 stage oral squamous cell carcinoma; T4 OSCC–T4 stage OSCC. CDH1 –E-cadherin; EMP–EMP1; CDH2 –N-cadherin.