MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405534554 · doi:10.1186/s12903-024-05330-2

Polyomaviruses and the risk of oral cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4405534554 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tahoora Mousavi, Fatemeh Shokoohy, Mahmood Moosazadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Oral Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPolyomavirus and related diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisPublication biasCancerInternal medicineConfidence intervalOral and maxillofacial surgeryHead and neck cancerOncologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Oral cancer (OC) is the most common malignant tumor of the head and neck (HN) and ranks 16th among the most frequently diagnosed cancers worldwide. A systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide an evidence-based analysis of the relationship between polyomaviruses and oral cancer. METHODS: The global online databases was used to identify relevant studies published between January 2000 and September 2024. The quality of each article was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) checklist. Data analysis was performed using STATA Ver. 11 software, and the standard error was calculated using the binomial distribution formula. The heterogeneity of the study results was assessed using the I-square and Q index, while publication bias was examined using the Begg's test. In addition, a random effects model was used to determine the risk difference (RD), and a forest plot diagram was used to present the results with 95% confidence intervals. The Trim and Fill test was applied to estimate publication bias, and sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the influence of individual studies on the overall estimate. RESULTS: Of the nine studies, the relationship between BK virus (BKV) and the Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCV) and oral cancer was investigated. In five primary studies, and by combining the results of these studies, the risk of oral cancer in MCV and BKV-positive individuals was significantly higher than in the negative groups by 13% (RD: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.26) and 2% (RD: 0.02, 95% CI: -0.03, 0.07), respectively. In addition, the association between JC virus (JCV) and oral cancer was investigated in six primary studies. By combining the results of these studies, the risk of oral cancer in JCV-positive individuals was 1% higher than that in JCV-negative individuals (RD: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.02, 0.06). DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis showed that there was a significant association between MCV and oral cancer, and the risk of oral cancer in MCV- positive individuals was 13% higher than that in MCV- negative individuals. More preliminary studies are needed on the association between BKV and JCV and the risk of oral cancer.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.204
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Oral HealthSame topicPolyomavirus and related diseasesFrench-language works237,207