ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparative cumulative index for assessment of regression of oral homogeneous leukoplakia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Effective treatment of oral homogeneous leukoplakia requires the use of an antioxidant with optimal properties to ensure a regression of the lesion with respect to size and colour, which is evaluated clinically and also with the help of salivary MDA levels. Despite the availability of various antioxidants, an improved standard evaluation system is needed for adjunct therapy of herbal antioxidants to widely systemically administered lycopene; a standardised evaluation system still needs to be improved. To develop a Comparative Cumulative Index (CCI) for assessment of regression of oral homogeneous leukoplakia that systematically evaluates and ranks adjunct herbal antioxidants to systemically administered lycopene based on their regression in size and colour of lesion and salivary MDA levels. CCI was developed through a structured process involving expert identification, panel discussions, and the establishment of scoring criteria. Two herbal antioxidants as an adjunct to systemically administered lycopene and lycopene alone (Groups A, B, C) were evaluated. Mean values for the core properties were calculated, and antioxidants were ranked accordingly. The total CCI for each antioxidant was computed based on the assigned scores for each property. Lesion size, lesion colour, and salivary MDA parameters all showed differences in CCI between the assessed treatment groups. Group C, with a 50% CCI. Group B's performance, with a CCI of 41%, is highlighted by deficiencies in several properties, whereas Group A came in third with a CCI of 34%. CCI provides a comprehensive antioxidant evaluation approach to assist practitioners in making informed decisions. The significance of balancing regression in lesion size and colour as well as salivary MDA levels is highlighted by Group C's high CCI. The results are in line with earlier studies that emphasized the significance of these traits in the treatment of oral homogeneous leukoplakia. The CCI makes it easier to compare adjunct antioxidant therapy based on empirical data and offers a reliable and equitable method of evaluating antioxidants. Future research should enhance the index and validate its use in a range of clinical contexts in order to improve treatment outcomes in oral homogeneous leukoplakia.
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.