Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29344805›Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2018

Salivary biomarkers for oral cancer and pre-cancer screening: a review.

J Kaur, R Jacobs, Y Huang, N Salvo, C Politis

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Revolutionizing Oral Cancer Screening: New Approaches and Emerging Technologies.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. [Latest Findings on Salivary Tumor Biomarkers].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2023
    Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

J KaurOMFS IMPATH research group, Department Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. jasdeep.kor@gmail.com.
R JacobsOMFS IMPATH research group, Department Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Y HuangOMFS IMPATH research group, Department Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
N SalvoOMFS IMPATH research group, Department Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
C PolitisOMFS IMPATH research group, Department Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BEState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of the study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature assessing potential salivary biomarkers of oral cancer and pre-cancer and discuss emerging issues and challenges in relation to oral cancer and pre-cancer diagnostics. MATERIALS AND

methodsSearch for articles involved the Medline, PubMed, and EMBASE. Specific terms were used from January 1995 to March 2017 by three experts.

resultsThis search collected 270 articles, of which 105 articles such as reviews, case reports, news, letter to editor, etc. in first round and 117 articles such as publications in other languages than English, non-human studies, etc. were excluded. The remaining 48 articles considered analyzing whole saliva as well as specific gland saliva. Thirty-one studies considered oral stimuli such as eating, drinking, and oral hygiene practices for varied periods of time prior to sample collection. The time of collection of saliva was morning in most studies, but the exact time of collection was not mentioned. Three studies showed to have evaluated the whole saliva without centrifugation. Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and tandem mass spectrometry were the most commonly used methods. Most of the potential salivary biomarkers of oral cancer are salivary proteins.

conclusionCombination approach of salivary biomarkers could be used as screening tool to improve early detection and diagnostic precision of oral pre-cancer and cancer. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The current findings are of importance for clinicians and researchers to mitigate the challenges in salivary-based diagnosis of oral cancer and to evaluate reliable, specific, and sensitive salivary biomarkers for oral pre-cancer and cancer diagnosis.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerBiomarkers, TumorElectrophoresis, Gel, Two-DimensionalHumansMouth NeoplasmsPrecancerous ConditionsSalivaTandem Mass SpectrometryBiomarkers, TumorBiomarkersDiagnosisOral cancerSalivaTumors

Identifiers

PMID29344805
OpenAlexW2789817537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.