ReviewReports (MDPI)2026
Podoplanin and Selected Cancer Stem Cell or Stemness-Associated Markers in Oral Epithelial Dysplasia: A Structured Narrative Review of Their Role in Malignant Transformation and Risk Stratification.
Review in Reports (MDPI), 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) comprise clinically and histologically heterogeneous lesions associated with an increased risk of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Histopathological grading of oral epithelial dysplasia (OED) remains central to risk estimation but has limited predictive precision. Podoplanin and selected cancer stem cell (CSC) or stemness-associated markers may capture complementary biological processes involved in progression.
objectiveTo synthesize evidence on podoplanin and selected CSC or stemness-associated markers as indicators of malignant transformation and risk stratification across a prespecified OPMD spectrum, while distinguishing longitudinal prediction from cross-sectional, diagnostic, and mechanistic evidence.
methodsThree original PubMed searches covered database inception to 13 July 2026. A post hoc recall audit against three key evidence syntheses identified one eligible longitudinal report missed during the initial selection; this report was added by backward citation checking. A broader supplementary sensitivity query was run during revision and reported separately without being merged into the original selection counts. In total, 47 publications were included. Study design, effect measure, threshold provenance, internal validation, and possible cohort overlap were charted and synthesized narratively.
resultsAmong the biomarkers reviewed, podoplanin had the most developed longitudinal evidence, including a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 3.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.40-5.76) in one meta-analysis. A separate diagnostic-accuracy synthesis reported sensitivity of 78.9% and specificity of 55.0%, corresponding to a positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 1.75 and a negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.38. Predictive values varied materially with baseline transformation risk. CD133, BMI1, and ABCG2 showed large associations in individual cohorts, but independent replication and external validation were limited. Cross-sectional expression gradients were not treated as evidence of prospective prediction.
conclusionsWithin the defined OPMD scope, podoplanin has the most developed longitudinal evidence, but its predictive values are prevalence-dependent and no marker is sufficiently validated for stand-alone clinical use. Prospective multicenter studies should compare prespecified biomarker models with established clinical, histopathological, and molecular predictors and should evaluate calibration, clinical utility, and external validity before management decisions are altered.
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.