2018
DOI: 10.1111/jop.12767
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical value of Naa10p and CEA levels in saliva and serum for diagnosis of oral squamous cell carcinoma

Abstract: Combined use of salivary Naa10p and CEA as tumor markers for OSCC was more sensitive than serum Naa10p and CEA. These results indicated that combined detection of salivary Naa10p and CEA improved diagnostic performance and early detection rate for OSCC.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
1
20
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Several studies have proposed the evaluation of the salivary and serum levels of IL-6 and/or IL-8 as promising biomarkers for oral cancer lesions, however, the sensitivity and specificity of these markers were low because they increase also in presence of various oral cavity inflammatory conditions [21,22]. Other studies focused the attention on tumor markers already used for the diagnosis of other solid tumors, such as the salivary levels of the carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA; 68.9% sensitivity, 73.3% specificity) [23], carcinoantigen 19-9 (CA19-9; no diagnostic value) [24] and CA125 (80.0% sensitivity, 66.0% specificity) [25]. However, the sensitivity and specificity of these markers were not high enough to diagnose effectively all oral tumors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have proposed the evaluation of the salivary and serum levels of IL-6 and/or IL-8 as promising biomarkers for oral cancer lesions, however, the sensitivity and specificity of these markers were low because they increase also in presence of various oral cavity inflammatory conditions [21,22]. Other studies focused the attention on tumor markers already used for the diagnosis of other solid tumors, such as the salivary levels of the carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA; 68.9% sensitivity, 73.3% specificity) [23], carcinoantigen 19-9 (CA19-9; no diagnostic value) [24] and CA125 (80.0% sensitivity, 66.0% specificity) [25]. However, the sensitivity and specificity of these markers were not high enough to diagnose effectively all oral tumors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They also found a correlation of salivary Naa10p level in OSCC patients with the degree of differentiation and lymph node metastasis and the salivary CEA level with the clinical stage and lymph node metastasis. The diagnostic performance of the combined approach improved the early detection rate of OSCC more than any of the two single approaches . Combination of zinc‐α‐2‐glycoprotein and peroxiredoxin‐2 protein yielded a significant discriminatory power in distinguishing the early‐ and advanced‐stage OSCC .…”
Section: Biomarkers In Oscc and Esccmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Despite the fact that the oral cavity can be readily to examined, most tumours are diagnosed in the late stage, which reduces the survival rate of patients [90]. The markers of solid tumours used so far, such as carcinoembryonic antigen or carcinoantigen 19-9, have not shown sufficiently high sensitivity and specificity in the effective diagnosis of all oral cancers [91,92]. It is known that some miRNAs are specifically associated with the presence of neoplasms, even in the early stages, which is important for the diagnosis of this neoplasm [93].…”
Section: Mirna In Ebv and Hpv-associated Cancersmentioning
confidence: 99%