ArticleCancer2021
Ultrasensitive detection of tumor-specific mutations in saliva of patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of Liquid Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Novel Disease-Specific Panel of Salivary microRNAs for the Detection of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma from Early Invasion to Stage IV Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Emerging Diagnostic Strategies for Oral Cancer and Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders: A PRISMA-Guided Scoping Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Biopsy for Suspicious Oral Lesions: A Review From the American Head and Neck Society-Cancer Prevention Service.Head & neck · 2026Review
- Salivary cell-free DNA in head and neck cancer: emerging clinical applications and future perspectives.Oncology reviews · 2026Review
- Liquid Biopsies in Head and Neck Cancers: Recent Developments Across Biofluids, Analytes, and Molecular Features.Head & neck · 2025Review
- Salivary and Serum Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers for HPV-Associated Oral and Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Cell-Free DNA as a Prognostic Biomarker in Oral Carcinogenesis and Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Translational Perspective.Cancers · 2025Review
- Liquid biopsy in head and neck cancer patients: blood, saliva, or both ?Precision clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Unlocking the Potential of Circulating miRNAs as Biomarkers in Glioblastoma.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Biological biomarkers of oral cancer.Periodontology 2000 · 2024Review
- Investigating Tobacco's Impact on DNA Repair Genes and Risks in Oral Precancer and Cancer: A Comprehensive Research Study.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2024Article
- Identification of Stage-Specific microRNAs that Govern the Early Stages of Sequential Oral Oncogenesis by Strategically Bridging Human Genetics with Epigenetics and Utilizing an Animal Model.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Mutation detection in saliva from oral cancer patients.Oral oncology · 2024Article
- Near-infrared imaging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma using indocyanine green that targets theJournal of biomedical optics · 2024Article
- Longitudinal detection of somatic mutations in the saliva of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma-affected patients: a pilot study.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Circulating tumor DNA in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma-current status and future prospects.Academia oncology · 2024Article
- Liquid biopsies based on cell-free DNA as a potential biomarker in head and neck cancer.The Japanese dental science review · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC) is the most common head and neck malignancy. Although the survival rate of patients with advanced-stage disease remains approximately 20% to 60%, when detected at an early stage, the survival rate approaches 80%, posing a pressing need for a well validated profiling method to assess patients who have a high risk of developing OCSCC. Tumor DNA detection in saliva may provide a robust biomarker platform that overcomes the limitations of current diagnostic tests. However, there is no routine saliva-based screening method for patients with OCSCC.
methodsThe authors designed a custom next-generation sequencing panel with unique molecular identifiers that covers coding regions of 7 frequently mutated genes in OCSCC and applied it on DNA extracted from 121 treatment-naive OCSCC tumors and matched preoperative saliva specimens.
resultsBy using stringent variant-calling criteria, mutations were detected in 106 tumors, consistent with a predicted detection rate ≥88%. Moreover, mutations identified in primary malignancies were also detected in 93% of saliva samples. To ensure that variants are not errors resulting in false-positive calls, a multistep analytical validation of this approach was performed: 1) re-sequencing of 46 saliva samples confirmed 88% of somatic variants; 2) no functionally relevant mutations were detected in saliva samples from 11 healthy individuals without a history of tobacco or alcohol; and 3) using a panel of 7 synthetic loci across 8 sequencing runs, it was confirmed that the platform developed is reproducible and provides sensitivity on par with droplet digital polymerase chain reaction.
conclusionsThe current data highlight the feasibility of somatic mutation identification in driver genes in saliva collected at the time of OCSCC diagnosis.
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.