ArticleHead and neck pathology2021
Epithelial Dysplasia in Actinic Cheilitis: Microscopic Study of 70 Cases from Brazil.
Article in Head and neck pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinicopathological Analysis of Actinic Cheilitis: A Systematic Review with Meta-analyses.Head and neck pathology · 2023Pooled it
- Laminin Immunostaining in Biopsies as a Useful Biomarker of Early Invasion in Actinic Cheilitis and Differential Diagnosis Between Actinic Cheilitis and Lip Cancer: New Insights.Head and neck pathology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare two grading systems of epithelial dysplasia-World Health Organization (WHO) and binary system (BS) -in actinic cheilitis (AC). Seventy cases diagnosed as AC in an Oral Pathology Laboratory from Brazil in the last 12 years were retrospectively retrieved, including the demographic data of each patient. All conventionally stained slides were reviewed, and epithelial dysplasia was evaluated by two independent observers using both WHO and BS grading systems. Data correlation was performed using kappa and chi-square tests (p < 0.05). Most patients were white men with a mean age of 57 years old and history of chronic exposure to sunlight. Most of the lesions were clinically described as whitish plaques with irregular surface located in the lower lip semi-mucosa. Most cases were microscopically graded as severe epithelial dysplasia and low-risk by both observers. The interobserver and intraobserver agreement between systems was slight. All reddish lesions were graded as severe epithelial dysplasia, showing an equal distribution between low and high-risk grading. Most ulcerated lesions showed severe epithelial dysplasia but was graded as low-risk of malignant transformation. Statistical significance was observed among the presence of "irregular stratification", severe epithelial dysplasia and high-risk lesions (p < 0.05) likewise among the presence of "loss of polarity of basal cells" and "drop-shaped ridges" (p < 0.05) with high-risk lesions. The absence of "increased mitotic figures", "dyskeratosis" and "keratin pearls" (p < 0.05) were strongly correlated to low-risk lesions. The presence of "hyperchromasia" was statistically significant with severe epithelial dysplasia (p < 0.05) as well the absence of "atypical mitotic figures" with low-risk lesions (p < 0.05). Although there was slight agreement between microscopic grading systems, microscopic analysis indicated that architectural epithelial changes individually may be the more reliable criteria to indicate the risk of malignant transformation in AC in both grading systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.