Diagnostic aids in detection of oral precancer and cancer: Past to present

Nambiar, K. Shwetha; Haragannavar, Vanishri C; Augustine, Dominic; Sowmya, S; Rao, Roopa S

doi:10.15713/ins.idmjar.47

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…TB stains abnormal more than normal cells (figures 2(A) and (B)), which helps identify any mucosal changes. Additionally, intracellular canals are comparatively wider in the malignant epithelium, allowing greater penetration and more retention of the dye in abnormal cells [88]. The extent of staining depends on the degree of epithelial surface The diagnostic efficacy of TB staining has been investigated in several studies.…”

Section: Vital Stainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the rate of false positives increases in low-risk populations [97]. Although this technique helps in the definitive diagnosis of visible lesions, it cannot diagnose deep-seated and microscopic lesions [88]. In cases where atypical and positive results are reported, a scalpel biopsy is typically recommended [6].…”

Section: Brush Biopsymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…VELscope® is a commercial device that uses tissue autofluorescence for screening oral precancerous lesions based on the structural and metabolic changes of the epithelium and connective tissue upon interaction with light. When stimulated with intense blue light (400-460 nm), normal oral mucosa appears pale green (figures 2(E) and (F)) [88,92]. Conversely, dysplastic and malignant lesions appear relatively darker because of reduced autofluorescence, which can serve to screen asymptomatic patients.…”

Section: Tissue Autofluorescencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Current and emerging techniques for oral cancer screening and diagnosis: a review

Bisht

Mishra²,

Yadav

et al. 2021

Prog. Biomed. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oral cancer causes over 350 000 deaths annually worldwide. Although most cases are in Asia, the incidence of oral cancer is rising across the world. Despite recent advances in screening methods, oral cancer remains a significant cause of mortality and morbidity. The 5-year survival rate (50%–60%) has not improved over the past several decades. Early detection and accurate diagnosis of the disease can improve the survival rate and patients’ quality of life. This article provides a topical review of current and emerging techniques for screening and diagnosing oral cancer. Currently available technologies have only been moderately useful towards identifying oral cancer early, motivating the development of novel approaches to address this goal. In this article, we provide an overview of adjunctive screening aids, including biofluid (saliva and serum) diagnostics, vital staining, brush biopsy, chemiluminescence, and tissue autofluorescence. Furthermore, we discuss diagnostic imaging modalities, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, ultrasound (including traditional B-mode imaging, color Doppler, and elastography), photoacoustics imaging, and optical coherence tomography, and artificial intelligence-based methods, which are either being used clinically or are under development for oral cancer staging. The physical and biological basis underpinning each technique are discussed, along with their advantages and limitations in the technological and clinical context. The review concludes with a discussion of the future perspectives in this rapidly evolving field.

show abstract

Section: Vital Stainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Brush Biopsymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tissue Autofluorescencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Current and emerging techniques for oral cancer screening and diagnosis: a review

Bisht

Mishra²,

Yadav

et al. 2021

Prog. Biomed. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Trending Breakthroughs in the Advances of Detection of Oral Premalignant and Malignant Lesions - A Review

Chandak¹,

Chandak²,

Thakare³

et al. 2021

jemds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oral cancer is the sixth most common malignant tumour, and it is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality due to its capacity to spread and invade. Oral cancer occurs at a different rate in different areas of the world, ranging from 2 to 10 per 100,000 people each year. Oral cancer is prevalent in South Asian nations such as Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. In India, the frequency is 7-17 per 100,000 people each year, with 75,000 - 80,000 new cases per year. Identifying oral cancer in its early stages has a significant impact on survival rates when compared to detecting it later. Despite this, almost half of all diagnosed patients die within five years. A variety of well-established cancer screening programmes have been demonstrated to lower the patient morbidity and mortality dramatically. Regular check-ups, which include a thorough inspection of the whole mouth, are critical for detecting malignant and pre-cancerous problems early on. Unfortunately, early detection of oral precancerous and cancerous lesions has proved difficult due to the lesions' asymptomatic nature, doctors' casual approach to benign lesions, and the fact that 50 % of patients had regional or distant metastases at the time of diagnosis. Oral cancer is one of the most common cancers that leads to defacement and death. Despite recent advancements in therapeutic modalities, the prognosis has not improved. Patient’s mortality rates are positively associated with the point of presentation, with 60 % of people diagnosed with late-stage illness. Early diagnosis is important for oral cancer patient’s survival rate, as it decreases morbidity and mortality. According to the World Health Organization, the bulk of oral cancer patients are diagnosed late in the disease's progression, with a mediocre 5 - year survival rate of 50 %. As a result, careful treatment of oral cancer necessitates early diagnosis and intervention. Surgical biopsy is the gold standard for medical purposes, but it requires clinical assistance. Other screening methods that are simple to use, non-invasive, and expensive are the norms for any test to be accepted as a histopathology choice. The older cancer diagnosis modalities took longer, had more inter-observer bias, and were less descriptive. A standard oral examination with digital palpation is used in traditional techniques of screening for oral possibly malignant illnesses and oral cancers. Conventional inspection has been shown to be a poor discriminator of oral mucosal lesions. A variety of visual aids have been developed to help clinicians spot anomalies in the oral mucosa and in recent years, scientific and clinical developments have aided in the early detection and treatment of this disease. This review reflects on some of the older diagnostic modalities and screening methods for oral cancer diagnosis, as well as some of the recent more sophisticated techniques. KEY WORDS Diagnostic Aids, Oral Cancer, Premalignant Lesions

show abstract

Assessment and Comparison of Salivary Survivin Biomarker in Oral Leukoplakia, Oral Lichen Planus, and Oral Cancer: A Comparative Study

Garg¹,

Shetti²,

Bagewadi³

2017

World Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is the most common malignant tumor of the oral cavity. It is preceded by various potentially malignant conditions like oral leukoplakia and oral lichen planus. Survivin is an inhibitor of apoptosis whose levels have been found increased in oral cancer as well as various potentially malignant conditions. Thus survivin can act as a biomarker and help in early detection of potentially malignant conditions which can prevent its transformation into malignancy. Aim To assess and compare the level of total human salivary survivin in oral leukoplakia, oral lichen planus, oral cancer, and control group. Materials and methods A total of 96 subjects were included in the study, which were further grouped into 24 in each group. The saliva was analyzed for survivin level among all the four groups. Survivin concentration (pg/mL) was studied in relation to clinical data. The results were analyzed using Mann—Whitney U test to derive the statistical difference. Results The average of levels of survivin in control group was 0.199 pg/mL, in oral leukoplakia group 0.312 pg/mL, in oral lichen planus group 0.380 pg/mL, and in oral cancer group 0.430 pg/mL. A comparison of all these groups revealed statistically significant difference among the groups. Conclusion Survivin may not be considered as an independent predictor of the malignant transformation for premalignant lesions but it can be an indicator for an increased risk of malignant transformation. How to cite this article Garg R, Shetti AV, Bagewadi AS. Assessment and Comparison of Salivary Survivin Biomarker in Oral Leukoplakia, Oral Lichen Planus, and Oral Cancer: A Comparative Study. World J Dent 2017;8(2):73-76.

show abstract

Diagnostic aids in detection of oral precancer and cancer: Past to present

Cited by 4 publications

References 27 publications

Current and emerging techniques for oral cancer screening and diagnosis: a review

Current and emerging techniques for oral cancer screening and diagnosis: a review

Trending Breakthroughs in the Advances of Detection of Oral Premalignant and Malignant Lesions - A Review

Assessment and Comparison of Salivary Survivin Biomarker in Oral Leukoplakia, Oral Lichen Planus, and Oral Cancer: A Comparative Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About