Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Kim,Do Hyun
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Lee,Jaeyoon, Lee,Min Hyeong, Kim,Sung Won, Hwang,Se Hwan
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358
Resumo: Abstract Introduction Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). Results Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2 = 9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). Conclusion Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone.
id ABORL-F-1_670c4bdd252e18079732d918208a7b85
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1808-86942022000300358
network_acronym_str ABORL-F-1
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
repository_id_str
spelling Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysisMouth neoplasmsChemiluminescencePrecancerous conditionsTolonium chlorideAbstract Introduction Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). Results Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2 = 9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). Conclusion Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone.Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.2022-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.88 n.3 2022reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngologyinstname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)instacron:ABORL-CCF10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.06.011info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKim,Do HyunLee,JaeyoonLee,Min HyeongKim,Sung WonHwang,Se Hwaneng2022-06-23T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1808-86942022000300358Revistahttp://www.bjorl.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br1808-86861808-8686opendoar:2022-06-23T00:00Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
spellingShingle Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Kim,Do Hyun
Mouth neoplasms
Chemiluminescence
Precancerous conditions
Tolonium chloride
title_short Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort Efficacy of chemiluminescence in the diagnosis and screening of oral cancer and precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
author Kim,Do Hyun
author_facet Kim,Do Hyun
Lee,Jaeyoon
Lee,Min Hyeong
Kim,Sung Won
Hwang,Se Hwan
author_role author
author2 Lee,Jaeyoon
Lee,Min Hyeong
Kim,Sung Won
Hwang,Se Hwan
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Kim,Do Hyun
Lee,Jaeyoon
Lee,Min Hyeong
Kim,Sung Won
Hwang,Se Hwan
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Mouth neoplasms
Chemiluminescence
Precancerous conditions
Tolonium chloride
topic Mouth neoplasms
Chemiluminescence
Precancerous conditions
Tolonium chloride
description Abstract Introduction Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). Results Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2 = 9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). Conclusion Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942022000300358
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.06.011
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.88 n.3 2022
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
instname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
instacron:ABORL-CCF
instname_str Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
instacron_str ABORL-CCF
institution ABORL-CCF
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
collection Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br
_version_ 1754575994958643200