Introduction: In the literature, there exists a wide range of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA prevalence for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), especially in relation to methods of viral detection and the lesion site. We estimated the pooled prevalence of HPV DNA in biopsies of HNSCC generically grouped versus oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) in relation to the method of viral DNA detection, with the primary end point of verifying if these two variables (specification of tumour site and method of HPV DNA identification) influence the datum on HPV assay. Methods: By means of MEDLINE/PubMED/Ovid databases, we selected studies examining paraffin-embedded (PE) biopsies of HNSCC and OSCC. According to the inclusion criteria, 62 studies were analyzed. The following data were abstracted: sample size, HPV DNA prevalence, methods of detection [PCR and in situ hybridization (ISH)] and HPV genotypes. After testing the heterogeneity of the studies by the Cochran Q test, metanalysis was performed using the random effects model. Results: The pooled prevalence of HPV DNA in the overall samples (Σ: 4852) was 34.5%, in OSCC it was 38.1% and in the not site-specific HNSCC was 24.1%. With regard to the detection method, PCR-based studies reported a higher prevalence rate than ISH-based rates (34.8, versus 32.9%) especially in the OSCC subgroup (OSCC PCR based: 39.9%). Conclusion: These findings support the assumption that a correct distinction of HNSCC by site, together with the use of more sensitive HPV DNA detection methods, should be considered as essential prerogatives in designing future investigations into viral prevalence in head and neck tumors.

Oral cancer is the sixth most common cancer type in the world, and 90% of it is represented by oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Despite progress in preventive and therapeutic strategies, delay in OSCC diagnosis remains one of the major causes of high morbidity and mortality; indeed the majority of OSCC has been lately identified in the advanced clinical stage (i.e., III or IV). Moreover, after primary treatment, recurrences and/or metastases are found in more than half of the patients (80% of cases within the first 2 years) and the 5-year survival rate is still lower than 50%, resulting in a serious issue for public health. Currently, histological investigation represents the “gold standard” of OSCC diagnosis; however, recent studies have evaluated the potential use of non-invasive methods, such as “liquid biopsy,” for the detection of diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in body fluids of oral cancer patients. Saliva is a biofluid containing factors such as cytokines, DNA and RNA molecules, circulating and tissue-derived cells, and extracellular vesicles (EVs) that may be used as biomarkers; their analysis may give us useful information to do early diagnosis of OSCC and improve the prognosis. Therefore, the aim of this review is reporting the most recent data on saliva biomarker detection in saliva liquid biopsy from oral cancer patients, with particular attention to circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), EVs, and microRNAs (miRNAs). Our results highlight that saliva liquid biopsy has several promising clinical uses in OSCC management; it is painless, accessible, and low cost and represents a very helpful source of diagnostic and prognostic biomarker detection. Even if standardized protocols for isolation, characterization, and evaluation are needed, recent data suggest that saliva may be successfully included in future clinical diagnostic processes, with a considerable impact on early treatment strategies and a favorable outcome.

The Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of Jaws (MRONJ) diagnosis process and its prevention play a role of great and rising importance, not only on the Quality of Life (QoL) of patients, but also on the decision-making process by the majority of dentists and oral surgeons involved in MRONJ prevention (primary and secondary). The present paper reports the update of the conclusions from the Consensus Conference—held at the Symposium of the Italian Society of Oral Pathology and Medicine (SIPMO) (20 October 2018, Ancona, Italy)—after the newest recommendations (2020) on MRONJ were published by two scientific societies (Italian Societies of Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Pathology and Medicine, SICMF and SIPMO), written on the inputs of the experts of the Italian Allied Committee on ONJ (IAC-ONJ). The conference focused on the topic of MRONJ, and in particular on the common practices at risk of inappropriateness in MRONJ diagnosis and therapy, as well as on MRONJ prevention and the dental management of patients at risk of MRONJ. It is a matter of cancer and osteometabolic patients that are at risk since being exposed to several drugs with antiresorptive (i.e., bisphosphonates and denosumab) or, more recently, antiangiogenic activities. At the same time, the Conference traced for dentists and oral surgeons some easy applicable indications and procedures to reduce MRONJ onset risk and to diagnose it early. Continuous updating on these issues, so important for the patient community, is recommended.

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is a serious adverse reaction of antiresorptive and antiangiogenic agents; it is a potentially painful and debilitating condition that can considerably affect the quality of life of patients. Furthermore, even if its epidemiology and pathogenesis have still not been fully clarified, several risk factors related to MRONJ have been recognized in prevention protocols. Three main risk factors are as follows: (i) the type of ONJ-related medications: antiresorptive (e.g., Bisphosphonates, Denosumab) and antiangiogenic drugs (e.g., Bevacizumab, Sunitinib); (ii) the category of patient at MRONJ risk: cancer versus non-cancer patient; (iii) the typologies and timing of dental treatments (e.g., before, during, or after the drug administration). The aim of this paper is to describe the new paradigm by the Italian Society of Oral Pathology and Medicine (SIPMO) on preventive dental management in patients at risk of MRONJ, prior to and during/after the administration of the aforementioned ONJ-related drugs. In reducing the risk of MRONJ, dentists and oral hygienists are key figures in applying a correct protocol of primary prevention for pre-treatment and in-treatment patients. However, the necessity of a multidisciplinary standardized approach, with a sustained dialogue among specialists involved, should be always adopted in order to improve the efficacy of preventive strategies and to ameliorate the patient’s quality of life.

Objective: This paper aims to describe the 2023 update position paper on MRONJ developed by the Italian Societies of Oral Pathology and Medicine (SIPMO) and of Maxillofacial Surgery (SICMF). Methods: This is the second update following the 2013 and 2020 Italian position papers by the Expert panel, which is a representation of the two scientific societies (SIPMO and SICMF). The paper is based on an extensive analysis of the available literature from January 2003 to February 2020, and the subsequent review of literature conducted between March 2020 and December 2022 to include all new relevant published papers to confirm or modify the previous set of recommendations. Results: This position paper highlights the main issues of MRONJ on risk estimates, disease definition, diagnostic pathway, individual risk assessment, and the fundamental role of imaging in the diagnosis, classification, and management of MRONJ. Conclusion: The Expert Panel confirmed the MRONJ definition, the diagnostic work‐up, the clinical‐radiological staging system and the prophylactic drug holiday, as recognized by SIPMO‐SICMF; while, it presented novel indications regarding the categories at risk of MRONJ, the prevention strategies, and the treatment strategies associated with the therapeutic drug holiday.