ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2024
Prognostic importance of mitosis quantification and PHH3 expression in oral epithelial dysplasia.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrated Clinical, Histopathological, and Inflammatory Parameters for Predicting Malignant Transformation in High-Risk Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders: A Prospective Study.Head and neck pathology · 2026Article
- PLK1 or WEE1 inhibition targets homologous recombination repair proficiency in BRCA1/2 wild-type high-grade serous ovarian cancer.Cell death & disease · 2025Article
- The Prognostic Value of Proliferative Activity in Cutaneous Melanoma: A Pilot Study Evaluating the Mitotic Rate and Ki67 Index to Predict Patient Outcomes.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Mitosis - predicting primary tumour and metastatic lymph node behaviour and beyond in OSCC - A pilot study.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Oral epithelial dysplasia (OED) is diagnosed and graded using a range of histological features, making grading subjective and challenging. Mitotic counting and phosphohistone-H3 (PHH3) staining have been used for the prognostication of various malignancies; however, their importance in OED remains unexplored. This study conducts a quantitative analysis of mitotic activity in OED using both haematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained slides and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for PHH3. Specifically, the diagnostic and prognostic importance of mitotic number, mitotic type and intra-epithelial location is evaluated. Whole slide images (WSI) of OED (n = 60) and non-dysplastic tissue (n = 8) were prepared for analysis. Five-year follow-up data was collected. The total number of mitosis (TNOM), mitosis type and intra-epithelial location was manually evaluated on H&E images and a digital mitotic count performed on PHH3-stained WSI. Statistical associations between these features and OED grade, malignant transformation and OED recurrence were determined. Mitosis count increased with grade severity (H&E: p < 0.005; IHC: p < 0.05), and grade-based differences were seen for mitosis type and location (p < 0.05). The ratio of normal-to-abnormal mitoses was higher in OED (1.61) than control (1.25) and reduced with grade severity. TNOM, type and location were better predictors when combined with histological grading, with the most prognostic models demonstrating an AUROC of 0.81 for transformation and 0.78 for recurrence, exceeding conventional grading. Mitosis quantification and PHH3 staining can be an adjunct to conventional H&E assessment and grading for the prediction of OED prognosis. Validation on larger multicentre cohorts is needed to establish these findings.
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.