Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32447493›Full record

SynthesisEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2020

Grading systems of oral cavity pre-malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Flora Yan, Priyanka D Reddy, Shaun A Nguyen, Angela C Chi, Brad W Neville, Terry A Day

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

6 authors.

Flora YanHead and Neck Tumor Center, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Rutledge Avenue, MSC 550, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA. yanf@musc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4775-0784
Priyanka D ReddyHead and Neck Tumor Center, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Rutledge Avenue, MSC 550, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Shaun A NguyenHead and Neck Tumor Center, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Rutledge Avenue, MSC 550, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Angela C ChiDivision of Oral Pathology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Brad W NevilleDivision of Oral Pathology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Terry A DayHead and Neck Tumor Center, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Rutledge Avenue, MSC 550, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) may have varying degrees of oral epithelial dysplasia (OED). Traditional grading schemes separate OED into three-tiers (mild, moderate, and severe). Alternatively, a binary grading system has been previously proposed that stratifies OED into low-risk and high-risk categories based on a quantitative threshold of dysplastic pathologic characteristics. This systematic review evaluates the predictive value of a binary OED grading system and examines agreement between pathologists.

methodsThis meta-analysis queried 4 databases (PubMed, Ovid-MEDLINE, Cochrane, and SCOPUS) and includes 4 studies evaluating binary OED grading systems. Meta-analysis of proportions and correlations was performed to pool malignant transformation rates (MTR), risk of malignant transformation between OED categories, and measures of interobserver agreement.

resultsPooled analysis of 629 lesions from 4 different studies found a six-time increased odds of malignant transformation in high-risk lesions over low-risk lesions [odds ratio (OR) 6.14, 95% 1.18-15.38]. Reported ORs ranged from 2.8 to 22.4. The overall MTR was 26.8%, with the high-risk and low-risk lesions having MTRs of 57.9% (95% CI 0.386-0.723) and 12.7% (95% CI - 0.210 to 0.438), respectively. Pooled unweighted interobserver kappa values for the binary grading system and three-tiered system were 0.693 (95% CI 0.640-0.740) and 0.388 (95% CI 0.195-0.552), respectively.

conclusionBinary grading of OED into low-risk and high-risk categories may effectively determine malignant potential, with improved interobserver agreement over three-tiered grading. Improved grading schemes of OED may help guide management (watchful waiting vs. excision) of these OPMDs.

Indexed as

Carcinoma in SituMouth NeoplasmsPrecancerous ConditionsCell Transformation, NeoplasticHumans

Identifiers

PMID32447493

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.