Role of Poor Oral Hygiene in Causation of Oral Cancer—a Review of Literature

Mathur, Rachit; Singhavi, Hitesh; Malik, Akshat; Nair, Sudhir; Chaturvedi, Pankaj

doi:10.1007/s13193-018-0836-5

Cited by 25 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other factors such as inflammation of gingival/periodontal, genetic variation, salivary dysfunction, dietary habits, and smoking can also lead to oral dysbiosis. [35][36][37] This review identified the various oral microbiota among oral cancer patients. The three major phyla (Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Proteobacteria) were the most prevalent bacterial found in oral cancer patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral microbiota in oral cancer patients and healthy individuals: A scoping review

Sufiawati

Piliang²,

Ramamoorthy³

2022

Dent. J. (Majalah Kedokt. Gigi)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Oral microbiota has been suggested to have a role in the etiopathogenesis of oral cancer; however, the oral microbiota diversity in patients with oral cancer compared to healthy individuals remains unclear. Purpose: This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of the current evidence regarding the oral microbiota composition colonized in oral cancer patients and its comparison with healthy individuals. Reviews: This study was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies were searched in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases from January 2015 to March 2022. A total of 20 relevant studies were included according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, including 14 cross-sectional studies and 6 cohort studies. All studies have identified various oral bacteria, but only one study has detected viruses and parasites diversity. A variety of oral microbiota found were 6 phyla of bacteria, 6 phyla of viruses, 7 phyla of fungi, and 7 phyla of parasitic. Seventeen studies proved that oral microbiota compositions were statistically significant differences compared to healthy controls, but not in 3 studies. Conclusion: The majority of studies showed various oral bacteria in oral cancer patients which were statistically significant difference compared to healthy controls. This study indicates the need for more research to evaluate viruses and parasites composition and diversity in oral cancer patients. Moreover, future research should focus to clarify whether the changes of oral microbial composition as a community may play a critical role in the etiopathogenesis of oral cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral microbiota in oral cancer patients and healthy individuals: A scoping review

Sufiawati

Piliang²,

Ramamoorthy³

2022

Dent. J. (Majalah Kedokt. Gigi)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They consider factors such as the oral hygiene index, the presence of halitosis, the number of missing teeth, brushing techniques used, the usage of mouthwash and so on. As a result, according to a study conducted in India on 337 people diagnosed with oral cancer, around 79 percent of them have poor oral hygiene [ 30 ]. Individuals’ cleanliness habits must be identified, as well as their motivation to maintain the greatest dental-periodontal status, as part of the screening required to get an early diagnosis of malignant tumor proliferation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive Factors in the Appearance and Evolution of Squamous Cell Carcinomas of the Oral Cavity

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A ten-year case-control study was conducted on patients selected from “St. Spiridon” Hospital-Iaşi, Romania. The study contained 1780 individuals diagnosed with oral squamous cell carcinoma. Results: For the patients under 46 years old: APC = −2.8 percent (95% CI: −24.4 to −7.1; p = 0.0012), with the observed rate of 30.18 percent. The incidence increased in patients aged 46 to 49 years (APC = 9.6%; 95% CI: 6.7 to − 10.4; p = 0.0081). For the age group 49 to 64 years old: APC = −2.4 percent (95% CI: −5.3 −1.6, p = 0.1239). For the age group 64–74: APC = −4.6, (95% CI: 1.4 6.9, p = 0.0108). The incidence of incidents was lower in the age group 74–80(p = 0.0025). For the age group 80–91: APC = 8.1 (95% CI: 6.4–14.2, p = 0.0024), with the incidence of cases: APC = 8.1 (95% CI: 6.4–14.2, p = 0.0024). Univariate analysis revealed a substantially higher risk of developing oral carcinoma in males (OR = 4.43; CI: 3.84–5.80). Age above 60, cigarette usage and alcohol abuse are significant risk factors for OSCC. Patients with lymph node dissemination, ulcero-vegetant form, stages II and IV, whose therapeutic approach consisted of radiotherapy and chemotherapy or radiotherapy only had a worse rate of survival at 24 months post-therapy. Conclusions: Our study highlights the increase in the incidence of OSCC in Romania during the research period, the decrease in the average age of diagnosed patients, as well as the degree to which the studied population is exposed to the main risk factors specific to this geographical area.

show abstract

“…Alcohol consumption, smoking, chronic mucosal irritation/trauma, and poor oral hygiene are considered risk factors for oral cancer [1][2][3][4][5]. Regarding the carcinogenicity of alcohol, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified alcoholic beverages into group 1 (carcinogenic to humans), since ethanol can be metabolized to acetaldehyde, a strong carcinogen [6][7][8][9][10][11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bifacial biological effects of ethanol: acetaldehyde production by oral Streptococcus species and the antibacterial effects of ethanol against these bacteria

Tagaino

Washio

Otani

et al. 2021

Journal of Oral Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Many previous studies have focused on the acetaldehyde produced from ethanol by oral bacteria as a risk factor for oral cancer. Most of these studies involved low ethanol concentrations (ca. 10 mM), but oral bacteria are exposed to a wide range of ethanol concentrations (100-10,000 mM) when alcoholic beverages are consumed. In contrast, ethanol is widely used at high concentrations (> 5,000 mM) as an antiseptic/disinfectant, suggesting that ethanol has bifacial biological effects; i.e. it acts as both a metabolic substrate for bacterial acetaldehyde production and an antimicrobial agent. Materials and methods:We examined the acetaldehyde production from ethanol by oral streptococci and the effects of ethanol exposure on the growth and viability of these bacteria at a wide range of ethanol concentrations (10-10,000 mM). Results:Acetaldehyde production was the highest at an ethanol concentration of 2,000 mM (2.1-48-fold higher than that seen at an ethanol concentration of 10 mM). Bacterial growth was inhibited by > 1,000 mM of ethanol, and the bacteria did not seem viable in the presence of > 5,000 mM of ethanol, although they still produced acetaldehyde. Conclusion:Ethanol has bifacial biological effects, and the concentration ranges of these effects overlap.

show abstract

Role of Poor Oral Hygiene in Causation of Oral Cancer—a Review of Literature

Cited by 25 publications

References 71 publications

Oral microbiota in oral cancer patients and healthy individuals: A scoping review

Oral microbiota in oral cancer patients and healthy individuals: A scoping review

Predictive Factors in the Appearance and Evolution of Squamous Cell Carcinomas of the Oral Cavity

Bifacial biological effects of ethanol: acetaldehyde production by oral Streptococcus species and the antibacterial effects of ethanol against these bacteria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About