Oral diseases · 2025
Independent Multicentre Validation of the 'Six-Point' Model for Malignant Transformation Risk in Oral Epithelial Dysplasia.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mahmood Hanya, Bradburn Mike, Islam Nadim M, Kujan Omar, Rajpoot Nasir, Santos-Silva Alan Roger, Vargas Pablo Agustin, James Jacqueline, Nankivell Paul, Mehanna Hisham, Khurram Syed Ali
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Histological grading of oral epithelial dysplasia (OED) is used for predicting malignant transformation risk. However, grading is associated with significant subjectivity and observer variability leading to inconsistency in prognosis prediction. Alternate histological feature-specific models ('six-point' and 'two-point') have been shown to have potentially better prognostic reliability than conventional grading. This study conducts a multicentre validation of these models.
METHODS: 102 OED cases (dating 2012-2017) were acquired from 4 independent centres (13 (13%) Sheffield; 40 (39%) Belfast; 30 (29%) Birmingham; 19 (19%) Piracicaba, Brazil) were independently scored using the 'six-point' and 'two-point' models. Feature prevalence, observer agreement and malignant transformation risk were evaluated and compared to conventional grading systems.
RESULTS: The 'six-point' system demonstrated superior predictive value (AUROC of 0.81) compared to the 'two-point' system (AUROC = 0.73, p = 0.004), WHO grading (AUROC = 0.71, p = 0.03) and binary grading (AUROC = 0.68, p = 0.009). Transformation rate for the 'six-point' model was 50% (95% CI 27%-78%) when all 6 features were present compared to 14% (95% CI 5%-32%) when 2-3 features were present.
CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the superior performance of the 'six-point' system for transformation prediction on a multicentric sample. Findings indicate that feature-specific models may be more reliable than existing histological grading systems for prognosis prediction.
METHODS: 102 OED cases (dating 2012-2017) were acquired from 4 independent centres (13 (13%) Sheffield; 40 (39%) Belfast; 30 (29%) Birmingham; 19 (19%) Piracicaba, Brazil) were independently scored using the 'six-point' and 'two-point' models. Feature prevalence, observer agreement and malignant transformation risk were evaluated and compared to conventional grading systems.
RESULTS: The 'six-point' system demonstrated superior predictive value (AUROC of 0.81) compared to the 'two-point' system (AUROC = 0.73, p = 0.004), WHO grading (AUROC = 0.71, p = 0.03) and binary grading (AUROC = 0.68, p = 0.009). Transformation rate for the 'six-point' model was 50% (95% CI 27%-78%) when all 6 features were present compared to 14% (95% CI 5%-32%) when 2-3 features were present.
CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the superior performance of the 'six-point' system for transformation prediction on a multicentric sample. Findings indicate that feature-specific models may be more reliable than existing histological grading systems for prognosis prediction.