ArticleOral oncology2023
Noninvasive genomic profiling of somatic mutations in oral cavity cancers.
Article in Oral oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Review
- Early-Onset Oral Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma in the Absence of Traditional Risk Factors: A Case Report with Whole-Exome Sequencing Analysis.Reports (MDPI) · 2026Article
- Circulating biomarkers in HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer: Clinical applications of liquid biopsy in diagnosis, prognosis, and surveillance.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2025Review
- Recent advances in the role of atypical cadherin FAT1 in tumorigenesis (Review).Oncology letters · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesSomatic mutations may predict prognosis, therapeutic response, or cancer progression. We evaluated targeted sequencing of oral rinse samples (ORS) for non-invasive mutational profiling of oral squamous cell carcinomas (OSCC). MATERIALS AND
methodsA custom hybrid capture panel targeting 42 frequently mutated genes in OSCC was used to identify DNA sequence variants in matched ORS and fresh-frozen tumors from 120 newly-diagnosed patients. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves determined the optimal variant allele fraction (VAF) cutoff for variant discrimination in ORS. Behavioral, clinical, and analytical factors were evaluated for impacts on assay performance.
resultsHalf of tumors involved oral tongue (50 %), and a majority were T1-T2 tumor stage (55 %). Median depth of sequencing coverage was 260X for OSCC and 1,563X for ORS. Frequencies of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) at highly mutated genes (including TP53, FAT1, HRAS, NOTCH1, CDKN2A, CASP8, NFE2L2, and PIK3CA) in OSCC were highly correlated with TCGA data (R = 0.96, p = 2.5E-22). An ROC curve with area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 0.80 showed that, at an optimal VAF cutoff of 0.10 %, ORS provided 76 % sensitivity, 96 % specificity, but precision of only 2.6E-4. At this VAF cutoff, 206 of 270 SNVs in OSCC were detected in matched ORS. Sensitivity varied by patient, T stage and target gene. Neither downsampled ORS as matched control nor a naïve Bayesian classifier adjusting for sequencing bias appreciably improved assay performance.
conclusionTargeted sequencing of ORS provides moderate assay performance for noninvasive detection of SNVs in OSCC. Our findings strongly rationalize further clinical and laboratory optimization of this assay, including strategies to improve precision.
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.