SynthesisBMC oral health2024
Polyomaviruses and the risk of oral cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research progress on carcinogenic factors and personalized treatment of oral cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Can BKPyV Infection Affect Neoplasm Transformation Among Kidney Transplant Recipients? A Case Series Study Report.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- BK Polyomavirus Prevalence in Renal Diseases: Associations with Immunosuppressants and Lymphocyte Subsets.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOral 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.
methodsThe 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.
resultsOf 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.