ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of salivary and serum Exosomal mRNAs as biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of oral squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Salivary Extracellular Vesicles: Paradigm Shift in Liquid Biopsy Diagnostics.Journal of extracellular biology · 2026Review
- Oral cancer in the era of precision medicine: molecular targets and technological innovations.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Recent advances in machine learning-enhanced extracellular vesicle omics for oncology.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Liquid Biopsies in HNSCC: Current Landscape and Emerging Opportunities in the Era of HPV Stratification.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Utility of Salivary Biomarkers in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally-invasive or non-invasive biomarkers from serum and saliva hold significant promise for real-time monitoring of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). However, the diagnostic potential of exosomes, which carry heterogeneous tumor-derived functional cargo remains largely underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic utility of exosomal mRNAs derived from saliva and serum samples of OSCC patients. Exosomes were isolated from paired serum and saliva samples of 40 OSCC patients and 40 healthy controls using commercial kits. Characterization was performed using NTA, TEM, zeta potential, protein/lipid quantification, and western blotting. Expression of nine mRNA markers including cytokines (IL1, IL6, IL8, TNF-α), proliferation markers (OAZ1, SAT, S100P), and metastasis-related molecules (MMP9, Chemerin) was analyzed by qRT-PCR. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using ROC curve analysis, and correlations with tumor grade and lymph node metastasis were systematically investigated. Results demonstrated that salivary exosomal TNF-α, MMP9 and OAZ1 exhibited markedly higher diagnostic sensitivity and specificity compared to the top-performing serum exosomal derived markers (IL1, MMP9 and OAZ1). Notably, a two-gene salivary mRNA panel combining TNF-α and OAZ1 demonstrated strong discriminatory power (AUC: 0.89, sensitivity: 80%, specificity: 90%; Youden Index: 0.70). Additionally, salivary exosomal MMP9, IL8, S100P, SAT, and OAZ1 significantly differentiated between grade I and grade III OSCC. Moreover, IL6 expression positively correlated with lymph node metastasis. In contrast, serum exosomal markers lacked clear discriminatory potential. Therefore, salivary exosomal panel of TNF-α and OAZ1 represent promising non-invasive biomarkers for OSCC diagnosis, while MMP9 and IL6 is informative for tumor grading.
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.