Question · asked by 1 review
Periodontitis vs Individuals without periodontal disease (by LOA): Malignant transformation (oral cancer development)
- Population
- Adults in case-control studies of oral cancer; people assessed for periodontitis
- Intervention
- Periodontitis
- Comparison
- Individuals without periodontal disease (by LOA)
- Outcome
- Malignant transformation (oral cancer development)
Periodontitis is associated with roughly a threefold higher odds of oral cancer (pooled OR 2.94, 95% CI 2.13-4.07; low certainty of evidence), though heterogeneity is moderate (I2=52.4%).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Periodontitis / periodontal disease (history or clinical diagnosis) vs No periodontitis (individuals without periodontal disease) Oral cancer (OC) · Adults in case-control studies of oral cancer; people assessed for periodontitis · Not specified, Case-control studies conducted in Asia (n=6), Europe (n=5), USA (n=2) and other countries (n=3), Overall (random-effects pooled estimate) Periodontitis is associated with roughly a threefold higher odds of oral cancer (pooled OR 2.94, 95% CI 2.13-4.07; low certainty of evidence), though heterogeneity is moderate (I2=52.4%). Periodontitis and the risk of oral cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control studies. (2024) All outcomes | OR 2.94 [2.13, 4.07] | 8 studies · 6927 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Periodontitis and the risk of oral cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control studies. 2024 All outcomes | Up to September 2023 (databases from inception) | 16 | Not applicable |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.