2019
DOI: 10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_164_17
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative evaluation of micronuclei in exfoliated oral epithelial cells in potentially malignant disorders and malignant lesions using special stains

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 8 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore the increase in MN was associated with genotoxic damage. 22 This event is related to the evidence found in a systematic review that supports the evaluation of MN in the oral epithelium as a biomarker of genotoxic damage since these MN would be a consequence of chromosomal instability caused by exposure to radiation and toxic chemical agents. 23 In this sense, our results could reflect a certain degree of genotoxicity in buccal epithelial cells related to work activity and open possibilities for the generation of future studies that assess not only the genotoxicity induced by artisanal mining activity but also its evaluation as a rapid, reliable, and valid effect biomarker in the assessment of cancer risk.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Therefore the increase in MN was associated with genotoxic damage. 22 This event is related to the evidence found in a systematic review that supports the evaluation of MN in the oral epithelium as a biomarker of genotoxic damage since these MN would be a consequence of chromosomal instability caused by exposure to radiation and toxic chemical agents. 23 In this sense, our results could reflect a certain degree of genotoxicity in buccal epithelial cells related to work activity and open possibilities for the generation of future studies that assess not only the genotoxicity induced by artisanal mining activity but also its evaluation as a rapid, reliable, and valid effect biomarker in the assessment of cancer risk.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 82%