Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34712619›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2021

Analysis of Salivary Mycobiome in a Cohort of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients From Sudan Identifies Higher Salivary Carriage of

Nazar Mohamed, Jorunn Litlekalsøy, Israa Abdulrahman Ahmed, Einar Marius Hjellestad Martinsen, Jessica Furriol, Ruben Javier-Lopez, Mariam Elsheikh, Nuha Mohamed Gaafar, Luis Morgado, Sunil Mundra and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Mycobiome: an underexplored kingdom in cancer.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Human Mycobiome.Current topics in microbiology and immunology · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

15 authors.

Nazar MohamedGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Jorunn LitlekalsøyGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Israa Abdulrahman AhmedGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Einar Marius Hjellestad MartinsenDepartment of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Jessica FurriolDepartment of Nephrology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Ruben Javier-LopezDepartment of Biological Sciences, The Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Mariam ElsheikhDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery/Department of Basic Sciences, University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan.
Nuha Mohamed GaafarGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Luis MorgadoSection for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (EvoGene), Department of Biosciences, The Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Sunil MundraSection for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (EvoGene), Department of Biosciences, The Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Anne Christine JohannessenGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Tarig Al-Hadi OsmanGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Elisabeth Sivy NginamauGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Ahmed SuleimanDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery/Department of Basic Sciences, University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan.
Daniela Elena CosteaGade Laboratory for Pathology, Department of Clinical Medicine, and Center for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Microbial dysbiosis and microbiome-induced inflammation have emerged as important factors in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) tumorigenesis during the last two decades. However, the "rare biosphere" of the oral microbiome, including fungi, has been sparsely investigated. This study aimed to characterize the salivary mycobiome in a prospective Sudanese cohort of OSCC patients and to explore patterns of diversities associated with overall survival (OS). Materials and Methods: Unstimulated saliva samples ( Results: Sixteen genera were identified exclusively in the saliva of OSCC patients. Conclusion: The fungal compositional patterns in saliva from OSCC patients were different from those of individuals without OSCC. The fungal genus

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Squamous CellHead and Neck NeoplasmsMalasseziaMouth NeoplasmsMycobiomeHumansProspective StudiesSalivaSquamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and NeckSudanbiomarkerCandidaMalasseziamycobiomeoral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)overall survival (OS)toombak

Identifiers

PMID34712619
PMCPMC8547610

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.