2002
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0714.2002.00153.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

AgNOR count as objective marker for dysplastic features in oral leukoplakia

Abstract: Mean AgNOR count could be a valuable criterion for defining objective parameters for diagnosis/determination of dysplasia distinguishing between dysplastic and non-dysplastic leukoplakia.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

5
17
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
5
17
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The mean AgNOR count increased as the grade of dysplasia increased in cases of OL, where as in the cases of OSCC there was no stastically significant difference between well and moderately differentiated OSCC. The AgNOR count has been thought to be a proliferation marker; therefore one would find a difference in normal mucosa, OL and OSCC as reported in literature (12)(13)(14)(15)(16). The inter observer variation between the two observers in our study was highly statistically significant (p<0.0001) indicating that the AgNOR counting method employed in our study is reliable.…”
Section: Comparison Of Agnor Count In Different Grades Of Ol and In Osupporting
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The mean AgNOR count increased as the grade of dysplasia increased in cases of OL, where as in the cases of OSCC there was no stastically significant difference between well and moderately differentiated OSCC. The AgNOR count has been thought to be a proliferation marker; therefore one would find a difference in normal mucosa, OL and OSCC as reported in literature (12)(13)(14)(15)(16). The inter observer variation between the two observers in our study was highly statistically significant (p<0.0001) indicating that the AgNOR counting method employed in our study is reliable.…”
Section: Comparison Of Agnor Count In Different Grades Of Ol and In Osupporting
confidence: 67%
“…In one study the cutoff value of 4.8 was proposed to differentiate between benign and malignant lesions in brush biopsy cases of suspicious lesions of oral cavity (17). In another study a cutoff point of 2.37 was proposed to differentiate between nondysplastic and dysplastic OL (16). Another study proposed that a mean AgNOR count >2.8 concurred with poor prognosis in OSCC and that T3 and T4 tumors >2.8 mean AgNOR counts were aggressive and may exhibit resistance to current treatment protocols (12).…”
Section: Comparison Of Agnor Count In Different Grades Of Ol and In Omentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the larger the number of NORs, the higher the replication rate of ribosomes and cells. This technique has therefore been used for the quantification of cell proliferation in different tissues and lesions [11,13,17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering the possible influence of smoking on the occurrence of oral cancer and of precursor lesions, together with the accessible location of the lesions which permits easy visualization and collection of material for analysis, exfoliative cytology might be a useful tool for the detection and monitoring of initial alterations [9,10] and for the establishment of adequate treatment in smokers [3,[11][12][13][14][15][16]. It is a complementary diagnostic method which presents several advantages such as rapid and easy execution, low cost, diagnostic safety, efficacy and noninvasiveness, and can be repeated several times [9,12,[15][16][17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…therefore, sensitive and specific biomarkers for oscc may be helpful in screening high-risk olK patients. Attempts to find biomarkers that identify premalignant oscc and cancerous lesions have resulted in several candidate genes associated with oscc tumor progression including p53, cyclin D1, epidermal growth factor receptor (13,14), Agnor (15), and Ki-67 (16). However, to date there are no widely accepted molecular biomarkers for olK carcinogenesis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%