Comparison of Immunohistochemical Markers in Oral Submucous Fibrosis and Oral Submucous Fibrosis Transformed to Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The objective of the study was to compare the expression of immunohistochemical (IHC) markers of oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) (non-transformed group) to those of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) transformed from OSMF (transformed group). The search for comparative cross-sectional studies was carried out in PubMed and Scopus abiding to the PICO criteria, where expression of IHC markers in OSMF were compared with that of OSCC transformed from OSMF. The cellular distribution, number of positive cases, staining intensity, and mean immunoreactive score (IRS) of each IHC marker were evaluated in both groups. A total of 14 studies were included in the systematic review, in which immunoexpression of 15 epithelial and 4 connective tissue biomarkers were evaluated. Expression of ß1-integrin, OCT-3, CD1a, CD207, survivin, Dickkopf-1, COX-2, hTERT, CTGF, MDM2, Ki-67, and α-SMA were increased during transformation of OSMF to OSCC. Conversely, expression of PTEN and lysyl oxidase decreased during transformation of OSMF to OSCC. Expression of a group of epithelial markers, such as COX2, hTERT, CTGF, survivin, MDM2, and p53, was 38 times lower in the non-transformed group cases compared to transformed group cases (95% CI: 58% to 10%; p = 0.01; and I2 = 90%). Meta-analysis of all markers involved in cell metabolism/apoptosis, which included ß1-integrin along with the above markers also suggested 42 times lower expression in the non-transformed group as compared to the transformed group (95% CI: 58% to 10%; p = 0.01; and I2 = 90%). Sub-group analyses on cytoplasmic and nuclear epithelial markers were inconclusive. Meta-analysis of connective tissue markers was also inconclusive. No publication bias was found. Instead of delving into numerous markers without a strong basis for their use, it is advisable to further study the markers identified in this study to explore their clinical utility.

Can Immunoexpression of Cancer Stem Cell Markers Prognosticate Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The objective was to evaluate the association of the immunoexpression of cancer stem cell (CSC) markers with clinicopathological and survival outcomes in tongue squamous cell carcinoma (TSCC) patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis [PROSPERO (CRD42021226791)] included observational studies that compared the association of clinicopathological and survival outcomes with CSC immunoexpression in TSCC patients. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as outcome measures. Six studies identified the association with three surface markers (c-MET, STAT3, CD44) and four transcription markers (NANOG, OCT4, BMI, SOX2). The odds of early-stage presentation were 41% (OR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.42-0.83) and 75% (OR = 0.25; 95% CI 0.14-0.45) lower in CSC and SOX2 immuno-positive cases than immuno-negative cases, respectively. The odds of well-differentiated tumors in transcription marker immuno-positive cases were 45% lower compared to immuno-negative cases (OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.96). The odds of positive lymph nodes were 2.01 times higher in CSC immuno-positive cases compared to immuno-negative cases (OR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.11-3.65). Mortality in immuno-positive cases was 121% higher than that in immuno-negative cases (HR = 2.21; 95% CI 1.16-4.21). Advanced tumor staging and grading, lymph node metastasis, and mortality were significantly associated with positive immunoexpression of CSC markers.

Innocuous presentation of ameloblastic carcinoma.

Ameloblastic carcinoma is a rare malignant odontogenic neoplasm that exhibits diverse clinical and radiological presentations. In fact there are several differential diagnoses during histopathological evaluation too. Lack of adequate reports could not establish the predominant demographic, clinical and radiological presentations. For the same reasons, the role of adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy is also unsubstantiated yet. This case discusses the innocuous clinical and radiological presentation of ameloblastic carcinoma in a 55-year-old man where the diagnostic confirmation was achieved through histopathological evaluation. The differential diagnoses, treatment and follow-up details of this case are discussed in light of the previous published case reports and systematic reviews of case reports in an attempt to increase the sensitisation among dentists towards ameloblastic carcinoma.