Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34690552›Full record

ReviewMediators of inflammation2021

Salivary Biomarkers in Lung Cancer.

Hans E Skallevold, Evan M Vallenari, Dipak Sapkota

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mediators of inflammation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Importance of oral health in mental health disorders: An updated review.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hans E SkallevoldDepartment of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, Oslo 0316, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9083-5188
Evan M VallenariDepartment of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, Oslo 0316, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4852-8608
Dipak SapkotaDepartment of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, Oslo 0316, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0061-825X
University of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A very low percentage of lung cancer (LC) cases are discovered at an early and treatable stage of the disease, leading to an abysmally low 5-year survival rate. This underscores the immediate necessity for improved diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers for LC. Biopsied lung tissue, blood, and plasma are common sources used for LC diagnosis and monitoring of the disease. A growing number of studies have reported saliva to be a useful biological sample for early and noninvasive detection of oral and systemic diseases. Nevertheless, salivary biomarker discovery remains underresearched. Here, we have compiled the available literature to provide an overview of the current understanding of salivary markers for LC detection and provided perspectives for future clinical significance. Valuable markers with diagnostic and prognostic potentials in LC have been discovered in saliva, including metabolic (catalase activity, triene conjugates, and Schiff bases), inflammatory (interleukin 10, C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 10), proteomic (haptoglobin, zinc-

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorGastrointestinal MicrobiomeGenomicsHumansLung NeoplasmsProteomicsSalivaBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID34690552
PMCPMC8528626
OpenAlexW3205802291

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.