ArticleJAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery2014
Positron emission tomography and stage migration in head and neck cancer.
Article in JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Head and neck MRI-based T stage and [European radiology · 2023Article
- Intensive Care Unit Admission and Survival in Stage IV Cancer Patients with Septic Shock: A Population-Based Cohort Study.Journal of Cancer · 2019Article
- Comparison of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with gallium-67 scintigraphy in the initial clinical staging of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.International journal of hematology · 2018Article
- The effect of pre-existing mental health comorbidities on the stage at diagnosis and timeliness of care of solid tumor malignances in a Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center.Cancer medicine · 2015Article
- Should PET/CT be implemented in the routine imaging work-up of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma? A prospective analysis.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2015Observational
- Correlation between PET/CT and CT in the staging prior to the treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importanceSince 2001, there has been a rapid adoption of positron emission tomography (PET) for diagnosis and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging of head and neck cancer (HNC) without data describing improved clinical outcomes.
objectiveTo determine the association between increased use of PET and stage and/or survival for patients with HNC in the managed care environment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsAdult patients diagnosed as having HNC (n = 958) from 2000 to 2008 at 4 integrated health systems were identified via tumor registries linked to administrative data. The AJCC stage distribution, patient and treatment characteristics, and survival between pre-PET era (2000-2004) vs PET era (2005-2008) and use of PET vs no use of PET during the PET era were compared. The AJCC stages were categorized to represent localized (stage I or II), locally advanced (stage III, IVA, or IVB), and metastatic (stage IVC) disease.
interventionsTreatments were determined by billing codes for surgery, radiation treatment, and chemotherapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome for this study was the use of PET. Secondary outcomes included treatment received and 2-year survival. A logit model estimated the effects of PET on diagnosis of locally advanced disease. Kaplan-Meier estimates described overall survival differences between PET and non-PET. Cox regression evaluated the association of PET on survival in patients with locally advanced disease.
resultsAn association between PET and locally advanced disease was found (odds ratio, 2.86 [95% CI, 1.90-4.29) (P < .001). Two-year overall survival for patients with locally advanced disease with and without PET was 52% and 32%, respectively (P = .004), but there was no difference for all stages (P = .69). On Cox proportional hazard regression, PET had no association with survival in patients with locally advanced disease (hazard ratio, 1.208 [95% CI, 0.778-1.877]) (P = .40). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The increasing use of PET among patients with HNC is associated with a greater number of patients with higher-stage disease and a dilution of the population with higher-stage disease with patients who have a better prognosis. Thus, the improved survival in patients with locally advanced disease likely reflects selection bias and stage migration. Further research on PET use among patients with HNC is necessary to determine if it results in improved treatment for individual patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.