Evidence Hub

Non-invasive detection and monitoring of oral squamous cell carcinoma and oral potentially malignant disorders: an umbrella review on diagnostic accuracy

Groenevelt MCC, Meulenbroeks L, Brakenhoff RH, Poell JB, Fransen MP, Zwinderman AH, Brouns ER, Peute LWP

Clinical oral investigations, 2026

Abstract

Objectives: Various non-invasive diagnostic techniques have been developed and assessed to improve early detection and monitoring of oral squamous cell carcinoma and oral potentially malignant disorders. However, a clear overview of the diagnostic performance and their ability to detect clinically relevant changes, is lacking. This study evaluated clinically tested, non-invasive techniques for early detection and monitoring of oral squamous cell carcinoma and potentially malignant disorders, focusing on diagnostic accuracy.

Methods: After a structured search strategy and critical selection of all relevant systematic reviews, data was extracted from 57 reviews in total, of which 29 were included for qualitative analysis, 20 for meta-analysis and eight for both qualitative and meta-analysis.

Results: Among nine techniques that are available in practice, optical coherence tomography, spectroscopy, and cytology with oral brushes demonstrated the highest effectiveness. Optical coherence tomography demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy, with a sensitivity and specificity estimated at 0.91 and a diagnostic odds ratio of 108.5. Furthermore, when combined with artificial intelligence, diagnostic accuracy is even further improved.

Conclusions: Most studies evaluating diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive diagnostic tests for potentially malignant disorders and oral squamous cell carcinoma grouped these conditions together without stratifying by lesion type. Therefore, no firm…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, 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