ReviewCureus2025
Exploring Surgical Oncology-Based Comparative and Systematic Analysis of the Diagnostic Potential of Various Novel Biomarkers in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is a widespread malignancy and has high morbidity and mortality rates. Identifying reliable biomarkers can help in improvement of diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment response. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the diagnostic potential of various novel biomarkers against HNSCC. A comprehensive search was taken place using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google scholar that covered range of studies published from 2019 to 2025. The search focused on biomarkers that related to HNSCC and its correlation with clinical outcomes such as survival rates and treatment response. Studies were selected on the basis of predefined eligibility criteria and included observational and experimental study designs. Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for respective study designs. The quality of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. A total of 12 studies were included in this review after full screening process. The studies evaluated several biomarkers that indicated towards significant correlations between certain biomarkers and HNSCC prognosis. Elevated levels of expression of specific biomarkers were associated with poor survival outcomes, while others showed promise in the prediction of recurrence and treatment efficacy. The review highlighted the effectiveness of novel biomarkers for improving the HNSCC management. However, further validation of these findings and establish biomarkers for clinical use.
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.