Evidence Hub

Computational Stemness and Cancer Stem Cell Markers in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review, Dual Meta-Analysis, and Functional Meta-Synthesis

Ardila CM, Pineda-Vélez E, Vivares-Builes AM

Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025

3 citations

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Stemness has been proposed as a unifying driver of invasion, treatment resistance, and relapse in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). We synthesized two complementary evidence streams to determine whether higher stemness predicts poorer survival in OSCC: (i) computational stemness signatures derived from transcriptomic/epigenetic data and (ii) tissue cancer stem cell (CSC) immunophenotypes by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Methods: Following PRISMA 2020, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and SciELO. Adults with histologically confirmed OSCC were eligible. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS); disease-specific survival (DSS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were secondary. Two parallel meta-analyses pooled effects within domains; random-effects restricted maximum likelihood (REML) models were applied. Results: Of 785 records, 11 studies met criteria. For computational signatures (k = 6), higher stemness was associated with poorer OS (pooled HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.61-3.12; I2 ≈ 49%). Sensitivity excluding the single unadjusted Kaplan-Meier (KM)-derived estimate yielded a similar effect (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.56-2.89). For CSC-IHC (main analysis, k = 2), CSC-positive profiles predicted worse OS (pooled HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.42-2.84; I2 ≈ 0%); results were robust to excluding an internally inconsistent study (single-study HR 2.078). An exploratory sensitivity analysis, including a 1-year HR (different time horizon), increased heterogeneity and was not…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free