Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26538482›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2015

Insights into immune responses in oral cancer through proteomic analysis of saliva and salivary extracellular vesicles.

Flavia V Winck, Ana Carolina Prado Ribeiro, Romênia Ramos Domingues, Liu Yi Ling, Diego Mauricio Riaño-Pachón, César Rivera, Thaís Bianca Brandão, Adriele Ferreira Gouvea, Alan Roger Santos-Silva, Ricardo D Coletta and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 149 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. From gut to mouth: salivary signatures of carcinogenic microbiota.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Flavia V WinckLaboratório de Espectrometria de Massas, Laboratório Nacional de Biociências, LNBio, CNPEM, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Ana Carolina Prado RibeiroInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Octavio Frias de Oliveira, ICESP, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Romênia Ramos DominguesLaboratório de Espectrometria de Massas, Laboratório Nacional de Biociências, LNBio, CNPEM, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Liu Yi LingLaboratório Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia do Bioetanol, CTBE, CNPEM, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Diego Mauricio Riaño-PachónLaboratório Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia do Bioetanol, CTBE, CNPEM, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
César RiveraLaboratório de Espectrometria de Massas, Laboratório Nacional de Biociências, LNBio, CNPEM, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Thaís Bianca BrandãoInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Octavio Frias de Oliveira, ICESP, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Adriele Ferreira GouveaInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Octavio Frias de Oliveira, ICESP, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Alan Roger Santos-SilvaFaculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, UNICAMP, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
Ricardo D ColettaFaculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, UNICAMP, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
Adriana F Paes LemeLaboratório de Espectrometria de Massas, Laboratório Nacional de Biociências, LNBio, CNPEM, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials · BRInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRBrazilian Biosciences National Laboratory · BRLaboratório Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia do Bioetanol · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development and progression of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) involves complex cellular mechanisms that contribute to the low five-year survival rate of approximately 20% among diagnosed patients. However, the biological processes essential to tumor progression are not completely understood. Therefore, detecting alterations in the salivary proteome may assist in elucidating the cellular mechanisms modulated in OSCC and improve the clinical prognosis of the disease. The proteome of whole saliva and salivary extracellular vesicles (EVs) from patients with OSCC and healthy individuals were analyzed by LC-MS/MS and label-free protein quantification. Proteome data analysis was performed using statistical, machine learning and feature selection methods with additional functional annotation. Biological processes related to immune responses, peptidase inhibitor activity, iron coordination and protease binding were overrepresented in the group of differentially expressed proteins. Proteins related to the inflammatory system, transport of metals and cellular growth and proliferation were identified in the proteome of salivary EVs. The proteomics data were robust and could classify OSCC with 90% accuracy. The saliva proteome analysis revealed that immune processes are related to the presence of OSCC and indicate that proteomics data can contribute to determining OSCC prognosis.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorChromatography, LiquidExtracellular VesiclesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMouth NeoplasmsPrognosisProteomeProteomicsSalivaTandem Mass SpectrometryBiomarkers, TumorProteome

Identifiers

PMID26538482
PMCPMC4633731
OpenAlexW2410993002

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.