Table 1.
Relationship between miR-29b-1-5p or c-Met expression and clinicopathological parameters.
| Parameters | miR-29b-1-5p | c-Met | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | Negative | Positive | |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 12 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Female | 10 | 19 | 12 | 17 |
| p value | 0.7679 | 0.5741 | ||
| Age | ||||
| <65 | 8 | 10 | 7 | 11 |
| >65 | 10 | 21 | 15 | 16 |
| p value | 0.5401 | 0.5647 | ||
| Site | ||||
| Tongue | 9 | 21 | 16 | 14 |
| Other | 9 | 10 | 6 | 13 |
| p value | 0.2416 | 0.1551 | ||
| Alcohol intake | ||||
| Habitual drinking | 5 | 15 | 4 | 7 |
| Social drinking | 5 | 7 | 10 | 10 |
| No drinking | 8 | 9 | 8 | 10 |
| p value | 0.3516 | 0.7650 | ||
| Smoking habit | ||||
| Yes | 6 | 8 | 9 | 8 |
| No | 12 | 23 | 13 | 19 |
| p value | 0.7442 | 0.5480 | ||
| Histological | ||||
| Differentiation * | ||||
| Well | 15 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| Mod, Por | 3 | 19 | 9 | 13 |
| p value | 0.0031 | 0.7738 | ||
| T classification | ||||
| T1–T2 | 15 | 22 | 18 | 19 |
| T3–T4 | 3 | 9 | 4 | 8 |
| p value | 0.4942 | 0.5072 | ||
| Clinical stage | ||||
| I, II | 13 | 16 | 14 | 15 |
| III, IV | 5 | 15 | 8 | 12 |
| p value | 0.2298 | 0.7707 | ||
| Nodal metastasis | ||||
| Negative | 15 | 19 | 16 | 18 |
| Positive | 3 | 12 | 6 | 9 |
| p value | 0.1975 | 0.7597 | ||
| EMT status | ||||
| Negative | 17 | 13 | 17 | 13 |
| Positive | 1 | 18 | 5 | 14 |
| p value | 0.0002 | 0.0453 | ||
| c-Met expression | ||||
| Negative | 9 | 13 | ||
| Positive | 9 | 18 | ||
| p value | 0.7665 | |||
Relationship between expression of miR-29b-1-5p or c-Met and clinicopathological parameters were calculated by Fisher’s exact test or the chi-square test. T classification and clinical stage were classified according to the TNM classification. * Histological differentiation: Well, well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma; Mod, moderately differentiated squamous cell carcinoma; Por, poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma.