Aims: Histological diagnostic criteria are used for the assessment of the degree of dysplasia and hence the risk of cancer progression for premalignant lesions. Clonal changes in the form of hyperorthokeratosis and hyperchromasia that are sharply demarcated from adjacent areas are not currently part of the criterion for dysplasia diagnosis. The objective of this study was to determine whether such clonal change should be regarded as a diagnostic feature for dysplasia. The following histological conditions were used to define such change: (1) hyperorthokeratosis; (2) hyperchromatism but no other features of dysplasia; (3) sharp margin demarcation from adjacent area by both the hyperorthokeratosis and hyperchromasia (clonal change), and (4) no prominent rete ridges, marked acanthosis or heavy inflammation. Lesions fitting these criteria were termed orthokeratotic lesions with no dysplasia.
Methods: Patients from a population-based longitudinal study with more than 10 years of follow up were analyzed. Of the 214 patients with primary oral premalignant lesions, 194 had mild or moderate dysplasia (dysplasia group) and 20 fit the criteria for orthokeratotic lesions without dysplasia (orthokeratotic with no dysplasia group). The two groups were compared for their cancer risks using clinical (site and toluidine blue), histological (nuclear phenotype score), and molecular criteria (loss of heterozygosity) and by outcome (progression).
Results and conclusions: The lesions from orthokeratotic with no dysplasia group showed a similar cancer risk (clinical, histological and molecular risk) and time to progression as the dysplastic lesions. We recommend that the clonal change should be included as a criterion for dysplasia diagnosis
"It was a pleasure to work with the editorial team of the journal on the submission of the manuscript. The team was professional, fast, and to the point".
NC A&T State University, USA
Moran Sciamama-Saghiv
The editorial process was quickly done. The galley proof was sent within a week after being accepted for publication.
The editorial team was very helpful and responded promptly.
India
Rohit Kulshrestha
Your services are very good
Chukwuka Ireju Onyinye
I am to express my view that Heighten Science Publications are reliable quick even after peer review process. I hope and wish the publications will go a long way in disseminating science to many inter...
College of Fisheries, CAU(I), Tripura, India
Ajit Kumar Roy
My candid opinion is that the service you render is second to none. My favourite part is the prompt response to issue, really i value that.
Abiodun Akanbi Adeogun
Journal of Pulmonary and Respiratory Research is good journal for respiratory research purposes. It takes 2-3 weeks maximum for review of the manuscript to get published and any corrections to be made...
Divya Khanduja
I do appreciate for your service including submission, analysis, review, editorial and publishing process. I believe these esteemed journal enlighten the science with its high-quality personel.
Bora Uysal
“It was a delightful experience publishing my manuscript with the Clinical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. They offered me lots of opportunities I never had from most publishing houses and the...
Asafo Jones
The service from the journal staff has been excellent.
Andy Smith
Great, thank you! It was very efficient working w/ your group. Very thorough reviews (i.e., plagiarism, peer, etc.). Would certainly recommend that future authors consider working w/ your group.
HSPI: We're glad you're here. Please click "create a new Query" if you are a new visitor to our website and need further information from us.
If you are already a member of our network and need to keep track of any developments regarding a question you have already submitted, click "take me to my Query."