## 3 Results
### Caries Experience  
As described in Table 4, CCS subjects showed significantly higher dmft scores as compared to healthy controls (\(p\) = 0.012), with the number of decayed primary teeth contributing most to the overall score (\(p\) = 0.002). CCSs treated for hematological malignancy before the age of 5 had more deciduous teeth with active caries compared to older children (\(p\) = 0.011). Dental decay was also significantly more prevalent among CCSs with shorter time of disease remission (\(p\) = 0.005). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**Groups** & **Stimulated Whole Saliva** & **pH** & **Salivary Buffering Capacity** \\ \hline CCSs (n = 32) & 1.0 (1.0) & 6.9 (0.7) & 10.0 (2.8) \\ Controls (n = 32) & 3.0 (1.0) & 7.7 (0.6) & 11.0 (2.0) \\ \(p\) value & \textless{}0.001 & \textless{}0.001 & 0.101 \\ Age at cancer therapy & & & \\ \textless{}5 years (n = 18) & 1.0 (1.0) *** & 6.7 (0.8) *** & 10.0 (2.0) \\ \(\geq\)5 years (n = 14) & 1.5 (2.0) * & 7.0 (0.6) * & 10.0 (3.0) \\ Controls (n = 32) & 3.0 (1.0) & 7.7 (0.6) & 11.0 (2.0) \\ \(p\) value & \textless{}0.001 & \textless{}0.001 & 0.195 \\ Years of remission & & & \\ \textless{}5 years (n = 15) & 1.0 (1.0) ** & 7.0 (0.4) ** & 11.0 (2.0) \\ \(\geq\)5 years (n = 17) & 2.0 (1.5) ** & 6.6 (0.7) ** & 10.0 (3.0) \\ Controls (n = 32) & 3.0 (1.0) & 7.7 (0.6) & 11.0 (2.0) \\ \(p\) value & \textless{}0.001 & \textless{}0.001 & 0.167 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: Values with superscript asterisks show statistically significant differences with respect to the control group: *\(p\) < 0.05; **\(p\) < 0.01; ***\(p\) < 0.001. Abbreviations: IQR = interquartile range; CCS = childhood cancers survivors.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Salivary parameters in the study groups (median, IQR). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**Variables** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Crude Effect**} \\ \hline  & **Odds Ratio** & **95\% Interval Confidence** & \(p\) **Value** \\ \hline Sex & & & 0.679 \\ Male & 1.00 & & \\ Female & 0.81 & (0.29, 2.20) & \\ Age at dental visit (years) & 0.93 & (0.75, 1.15) & 0.506 \\ Cancer treatment & & & 0.003 \\ No & 1.00 & & \\ Yes & 5.22 & (1.74, 15.61) & \\ Age at cancer therapy & & & \\ Healthy controls & 1.00 & & \\ \textless{}5 years & 11.69 & (2.29, 59.70) & 0.003 \\ \(\geq\)5 years & 2.63 & (0.72, 9.66) & 0.145 \\ Years of remission & & & \\ Healthy controls & 1.00 & & \\ \textless{}5 years & 5.85 & (1.37, 24.89) & 0.017 \\ \(\geq\)5 years & 4.75 & (1.26, 17.86) & 0.021 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Univariate logistic regression analysis: low vs. normal stimulated salivary flow rate. With regard to the prevalence of dental caries in the permanent dentition, as described in Table 5, CCS children showed significantly higher DMFT scores compared to healthy controls (\(p<0.001\)); in particular, they presented more decayed (\(p=0.015\)) and filled teeth (\(p<0.001\)). The DMFT values were also higher among survivors treated when older than 5 years of age (\(p<0.001\)), mainly for filled (\(p=0.033\)) and missing components (\(p<0.001\)), compared to healthy controls. A significant difference was also found when data were stratified according to the follow-up time after the end of cancer treatment, with higher DMTF values among children in remission for at least 5 years (\(p=0.001\)). Salivary pH (\(p=-0.403\), \(p=0.001\)) and buffer capacity (\(p=-0.315\), \(p=0.11\)) both showed a significant negative correlation with DMFT scores.