New oral cytodiagnostic criteria predict change to oral epithelial dysplasia (OED) and cancerization

Abstract

Objectives The purpose of this retrospective observational study was to evaluate the specificity of the new oral cytodiagnostic criteria and whether the new criteria predict change to oral epithelial dysplasia (OED) and cancerization for leukoplakia and oral lichen planus (OLP). Study design Fifty‐three cases of leukoplakia without OED and 126 cases of OLP were included in this study. Liquid‐based cytology (LBC) was performed just before biopsy. We evaluated the specificity of the new oral cytodiagnostic criteria and the rates of change to OED and cancerization for each cytodiagnosis in leukoplakia and OLP. Results One hundred and seventy patients were negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), seven had low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSILs), and two were indefinite for neoplasia (IFN). The specificity was 95% and the rates of OED change and cancerization in the observation period were 3.4% and 1.7%. In leukoplakia, there was a significant difference in the rates of change to OED and cancerization between negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM) and LSIL (odds ratio: 12.9; 95% CI: 1.72‐96.73). Conclusions The new oral cytodiagnostic criteria have high specificity for oral mucosal lesions. And, it was suggested that the cases diagnosed with LSIL using new criteria have a high possibility of change to OED or cancerization in leukoplakia.

Uncommon case of cytopathological features of sialadenoma papilliferum

“…In Japan, the classification of oral cytology is based on the Bethesda system for the uterine cervix, which comprises five categories (1) negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy, (2) low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or malignancy, (3) high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or high‐grade dysplasia (HSIL), (4) squamous cell carcinoma, and (5) IFN 8 . This classification was developed for squamous epithelial neoplasms but not salivary gland tumors 8 . Due to the unusual cytological findings in our case, there was no alternative but to consider the lesion as IFN.…”

“…8 This classification was developed for squamous epithelial neoplasms but not salivary gland tumors. 8 F I G U R E 3 Histology in sialadenoma papilliferum. An exophytic papillary tumor is seen (A).…”

Novel cytological model for the identification of early oral cancer diagnostic markers: The carcinoma sequence model

“…Fixed specimens were rehydrated with distilled water and subsequently, subjected to nuclear staining with hematoxylin solution and cytoplasmic staining with Orange G solution (Muto Pure Chemicals Co., Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) and Eosin Azure solution (Muto Pure Chemicals Co., Ltd.). Cytological diagnosis was based on the oral Bethesda system ( 31 ).…”

Clinicopathologic factors influencing the screening accuracy of oral cytology: A retrospective cohort study

“…Cytologic screening based on the oral Bethesda system was categorized according to the following classification scheme by oral pathologists: inadequate, negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) ( 18 ). All histological diagnoses were made in accordance with World Health Organization (WHO) 2017 criteria ( 19 ).…”