ReviewHNO2016
[Is (chemo)radiotherapy really the future standard in the treatment of oropharyngeal carcinoma?].
Review in HNO, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence-based guideline diagnosis, treatment, prevention and aftercare of oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2025Guideline
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment of patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) requires interdisciplinary collaboration. Besides oncologic control, organ and function preservation are important priorities. One treatment option is primary concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), particularly for locally advanced head and neck cancer. Another option is sequential CRT, where induction chemotherapy may be followed either by radiation alone or by CRT. An important aspect of these modalities is the development of functional sequelae with regards to swallowing as a direct consequence of radiogenic fibrosis, as well as tissue ctoxicity associated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Conventional open surgical approaches are being increasingly replaced by transoral surgical modalities with less treatment-related morbidity. As a further, equally important goal of appropriately indicated surgery, adjuvant (C)RT may be omitted or the dose significantly reduced. The advantages of primary surgery over primary CRT may be less obvious in cases still requiring adjuvant treatment, although not necessarily completely eliminated. For patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-driven OPSCC, it is important to note that primary surgery may provide comparable or even increased survival benefit. To date, there is no evidence for a clear advantage of primary CRT over primary surgery in this group. In these cases, a de-escalated treatment package may be the preferred option. Here, the application of radioimmunotherapy as well as a reduced radiation dose may minimize long-term treatment-related morbidities.
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.