ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03682562Updated Jul 15, 2020

Diagnostic Accuracy of Salivary DNA Integrity Index in Oral Malignant and Premalignant Lesions

An observational study in Oral Cancer, Oral Lichen Planus and Oral Leukoplakia, sponsored by Cairo University. Completed at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 20 Years to 70 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-07-15.

Primary conditionLeukoplakia, OralRegistry: Mouth NeoplasmsReclassifiedWhy we changed it
Registry
Mouth Neoplasms — the first condition term the registry derived for this study.
ClinicalTrials.gg
Leukoplakia, Oral
Why
  1. The study's listed conditions name Leukoplakia, Oral, a narrower term within Mouth Neoplasms.
Confidence
High: the new condition is named in the study's own listed conditions. Of 351 hand-checked studies reclassified this way, 68% were exactly right and 84% in the right disease family; the registry's first term was right for 5% (measured 2026-10-21). How we classify →
Wrong?
Tell us the study's main condition →

Sponsored by Cairo University · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-control
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
93
Ages
20 Years to 70 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study aims to identify the accuracy of DNA integrity index in differentiating between oral premalignant lesions and oral cancer.

Read the detailed description

As stated by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, the main screening test for oral cancer remains conventional oral examination of the oral cavity. Most cases of oral cancer are preceded by a clinically visible lesion. These lesions are called oral potentially malignant disorders. These are leukoplakia, erythroplakia, oral submucous fibrosis, oral lichen planus and discoid lupus erythematosis. Leukoplakia has a reported annual transformation rate of 2-3%, while OLP has a rate of 0.5% .

Full thickness tissue biopsy is the "gold standard" for diagnosing suspicious lesions should they be encountered during COE. However, oral biopsy is an invasive technique that can be challenging in sites as the floor of the mouth or the soft palate . The invasive nature of a biopsy also makes it unsuitable for cancer screening in high-risk populations.

Thus there is a need for a diagnostic aid that can help primary care providers determine which patients need to be biopsied or referred to a specialist.

Nucleic acids can be released actively or passively into the circulation by both living and dead cells, where the latter is considered the predominant source. Programmed cell death gives neatly digested DNA fragments of approximately 180 bp in length. In case of solid tumors, cell-free DNA is released through necrosis which generates longer DNA fragments due to haphazard and incomplete digestion of DNA. Thus, the integrity of the DNA fragment can determine its origin making DNA integrity a potential marker for oral cancer.

The DNA integrity index (DII) is the ratio between the longer DNA fragments to the shorter ones. A higher index has been reported in breast, prostate, liver and cervical cancer. Jiang et al. 2006 found that the DNA integrity index was significantly higher in oral cancer patients than in normal ones and reported a sensitivity and specificity values of 84.5% 83% respectively . The next step for such a marker would be early quantification of performance in clinical settings to determine if it is possible to extrapolate cut off values.

02

Conditions studied

  • Oral Cancer
  • Oral Lichen Planus
  • Oral Leukoplakia

Browse trials for

03

In context

Leukoplakia, Oral Reclassified

48 studies on the registry are indexed under Leukoplakia, Oral; 11 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 93 is close to the median of 97 across 20 observational studies indexed under Leukoplakia, Oral.

Browse Leukoplakia, Oral studies →

Lead sponsor

Cairo University is the lead sponsor of 4,941 studies on the registry; 1,457 are open to participants now.

Of its 37 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 5 (14%) have results posted.

Compared within Leukoplakia, Oral, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Mouth Neoplasms. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
20 Years to 70 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Group I: (Clinical examination and Biopsy) Patients diagnosed clinically and histopathologically as having oral cancer. Group II: (History and Clinical examination)

Patients who give a history of:

  • No smoking
  • No alcohol
  • No systemic disease; and who on conventional oral examination(National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, 2013b) have:
  • No visible oral lesions on conventional oral examination .
  • Good oral hygiene. Group III: (Clinical examination and Biopsy) Patients diagnosed clinically and histopathologically with oral lichen planus as stated by modified WHO criteria (van der Meij and van der Waal, 2003).

Eligibility criteria

Patients in this study will be divided into three groups:

Group I: Patients diagnosed histopathologically with oral cancer recruited from the National Cancer Institute, who have yet to receive treatment.

Group II: Healthy Controls

Inclusion Criteria:

  • No visible oral lesions as detected by conventional oral examination
  • Good oral hygiene, with healthy gingival tissues
  • Non-smokers
  • No systemic disease Group III: Patients diagnosed with oral lichen planus according to the modified WHO (van der Meij and van der Waal, 2003)diagnostic criteria not receiving treatment at least 8 weeks prior to enrollment.
05

Study design

Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
93 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No
Biospecimen retention
Samples with dna

Groups and cohorts

  • Oral Cancer

    Patients diagnosed clinically and histopathologically as having oral cancer.

    Diagnostic Test: DNA Integrity Index

  • Premalignant Oral Lesions

    Patients diagnosed clinically and histopathologically with either leukoplakia or oral lichen planus as stated by modified WHO criteria

    Diagnostic Test: DNA Integrity Index

  • Normal Subjects

    Patients who give a history of: * No smoking * No alcohol * No systemic disease; and who on conventional oral examination have: * No visible oral lesions on conventional oral examination . * Good oral hygiene.

    Diagnostic Test: DNA Integrity Index

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testDNA Integrity Index

    This test will be performed for ALL three groups: Sample collection: Patients will be given a sterile cup containing 5mL saline solution with which they will vigorously rinse their mouth while rubbing their tongues against the oral mucosa for 30 seconds, then spit it back into the cup. The solution will then be used for DNA extraction. DNA integrity analysis: The DNA integrity will be done through measuring a housekeeping gene using competitive polymerase chain reaction where the isolated DNA will be combined with DNA capture probes for sequence-specific DNA fragments. The DNA integrity index will be calculated as the ratio of the concentration of longer DNA fragments to the ratio of shorter ones.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Difference in DNA Integrity Index

    The DNA integrity will be compared between the three group to determine whether there is a difference between them in that aspect or not

    Time frame: 1 month after the end of patient recruitment

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Faculty of Dentistry - Cairo University
    Cairo, 11553, Egypt
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided — According to the mode of data entry, if it is solely numerical it can be more easily shared and deposited on repositories, however patient clinical photos may not be possible to share

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Sep 2019 to primary completion in Mar 2020, 5 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Sep 21, 2018
First posted
Sep 24, 2018
StartActual
Sep 15, 2019
Primary completionActual
Mar 10, 2020
CompletionActual
Mar 10, 2020
Last update
Jul 15, 2020
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 15, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03682562
Lead sponsor
Cairo University
Responsible party
Noha Adel Azab (Researcher, Cairo University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 24, 2018
Start date
Sep 15, 2019
Primary completion
Mar 10, 2020
Completion
Mar 10, 2020
Last update
Jul 15, 2020

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion