A biomarker is defined as a biological molecule found in the blood, other body fluids, or tissues that is a sign of normal or abnormal processes or a condition or disease. In cancer research, biomarkers are classified as diagnostic, prognostic, or predictive. The identification and application of biomarkers in clinical practice are important for evaluating their usefulness for clinical diagnosis, treatment and prognostic warning and for determining the biological effects of anti-cancer drugs, and they are currently one of the hottest topics in oncological translational research. Currently, translational research on biomarkers mostly focus on oncological diagnosis and molecular typing, targeted therapy, treatment protocol selection and optimization, prognostic prediction, etc. Here, we review the progress of translational research on treatments based on biomarkers in oral squamous cell carcinoma as well as the clinical application of inhibitors targeting EGFR, PD1, PI3K, WEE1, the Wnt/β-catenin pathway, the SHH pathway, and the ERK pathway. The prospect of research strategies for personalized treatments based on biomarkers in oral squamous cell carcinoma is also discussed.

Objective:To compare the effect of temporal external fixator and digital guide plate in the immediate reconstruction of mandibular defect after segmental mandibulectomy.Methods:The clinical data of all patients who received segmental mandibulectomy and immediate mandibular reconstruction with free vascularized bone graft by a single surgical team in the Department of Oral & Maxillofacial-Head & Neck Oncology, Shanghai Ninth People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from August 2016 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different auxiliary methods, the patients were divided into temporal external fixator (TEF) group and computer aided design-manufacture (CAD-CAM) group. The width of mandible, length of mandibular body and vertical dimension of inferior 1/3 face were measured by CT before and one month after surgery, and the difference before and after surgery was calculated to evaluate the surgical effect. SPSS 19.0 was used for statistical analysis, and the data were expressed as Mean ± SD. Independent sample t-test was used for comparison of indexes of surgical time and surgical effect evaluation between the two groups, and P<0.05 indicated statistically significant differences. Results:A total of 29 patients were enrolled, including 13 patients in TEF group, 4 males and 9 females, aged (47.7±14.5) years, including 7 ameloblastomas, 2 squamous cell carcinomas, 2 abnormal proliferation of bone fibers, 1 rhabdomyosarcoma and 1 osteosarcoma. In the CAD-CAM group, there were 16 cases, including 11 males and 5 females, aged (42.4±19.7) years, including 10 ameloblastomas, 3 squamous cell carcinomas, 1 osteoblastoma, 1 otogenic fibromyxoma and 1 osteosarcoma. The bone grafts in 29 patients were all alive, the wounds healed primarily, and the occlusal relationship and facial contour of the patients were fine. After 3 years follow-up, there were no postoperative complications and tumor recurrence. The function of the supply area was not affected. The operative time was (7.12±1.40) h in the TEF group and (4.72±1.10) h in the CAD-CAM group, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( P<0.01). In the TEF group, the difference of the width of mandible, length of mandibular body and vertical dimension of inferior 1/3 face were (1.08±1.12) mm, (2.08±1.61) mm, (1.77±3.15) mm, respectively; CAD-CAM group were (0.88±1.15) mm, (0.94±1.34) mm, (0.87±1.47) mm, respectively, and there was no statistical significance between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusions:It took significantly longer to perform immediate mandibular reconstruction assisted by TEF than that assisted by CAD-CAM in surgery, but both groups achieved better surgical results. It is simpler and more effective to use TEF when time is urgent or technology is too limited to carry out preoperative digital design.

Objective:To compare the effect of temporal external fixator and digital guide plate in the immediate reconstruction of mandibular defect after segmental mandibulectomy.Methods:The clinical data of all patients who received segmental mandibulectomy and immediate mandibular reconstruction with free vascularized bone graft by a single surgical team in the Department of Oral & Maxillofacial-Head & Neck Oncology, Shanghai Ninth People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from August 2016 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different auxiliary methods, the patients were divided into temporal external fixator (TEF) group and computer aided design-manufacture (CAD-CAM) group. The width of mandible, length of mandibular body and vertical dimension of inferior 1/3 face were measured by CT before and one month after surgery, and the difference before and after surgery was calculated to evaluate the surgical effect. SPSS 19.0 was used for statistical analysis, and the data were expressed as Mean ± SD. Independent sample t-test was used for comparison of indexes of surgical time and surgical effect evaluation between the two groups, and P<0.05 indicated statistically significant differences. Results:A total of 29 patients were enrolled, including 13 patients in TEF group, 4 males and 9 females, aged (47.7±14.5) years, including 7 ameloblastomas, 2 squamous cell carcinomas, 2 abnormal proliferation of bone fibers, 1 rhabdomyosarcoma and 1 osteosarcoma. In the CAD-CAM group, there were 16 cases, including 11 males and 5 females, aged (42.4±19.7) years, including 10 ameloblastomas, 3 squamous cell carcinomas, 1 osteoblastoma, 1 otogenic fibromyxoma and 1 osteosarcoma. The bone grafts in 29 patients were all alive, the wounds healed primarily, and the occlusal relationship and facial contour of the patients were fine. After 3 years follow-up, there were no postoperative complications and tumor recurrence. The function of the supply area was not affected. The operative time was (7.12±1.40) h in the TEF group and (4.72±1.10) h in the CAD-CAM group, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( P<0.01). In the TEF group, the difference of the width of mandible, length of mandibular body and vertical dimension of inferior 1/3 face were (1.08±1.12) mm, (2.08±1.61) mm, (1.77±3.15) mm, respectively; CAD-CAM group were (0.88±1.15) mm, (0.94±1.34) mm, (0.87±1.47) mm, respectively, and there was no statistical significance between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusions:It took significantly longer to perform immediate mandibular reconstruction assisted by TEF than that assisted by CAD-CAM in surgery, but both groups achieved better surgical results. It is simpler and more effective to use TEF when time is urgent or technology is too limited to carry out preoperative digital design.