ReviewCurrent oncology reports2016
The Role of Transoral Robotic Surgery in the Management of HPV Negative Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Review in Current oncology reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical Treatment for Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Analysis of T1-T2 stage oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with transoral robotic surgery.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
- Five-year survival outcomes in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma following transoral laser microsurgery.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
- Transoral robotic surgery with neck dissection versus nonsurgical treatment in stage I and II human papillomavirus-negative oropharyngeal cancer.Head & neck · 2022Article
- Review
- Prognostic factors associated with achieving total oral diet after glossectomy with microvascular free tissue transfer reconstruction.Oral oncology · 2019Article
- Robotics in Cleft Surgery: Origins, Current Status and Future Directions.Robotic surgery (Auckland) · 2019Review
- A Contemporary Review of Evidence for Transoral Robotic Surgery in Laryngeal Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Review
- What should we expect from robotic surgery for second primary oropharyngeal cancer?European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2017Article
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
The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is on the rise. This is largely due to the rapid increase in HPV positive OPSCC, which has been shown to confer a survival advantage. HPV negative OPSCC, however, has a more aggressive tumor biology and is a challenge to treat with standard current therapies. Chemoradiation has demonstrated poor locoregional control in HPV negative OPSCC, and open surgeries are associated with high morbidity. Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) has been proposed as an option to both intensify treatment and decrease surgical morbidity for patients with HPV negative OPSCC. TORS can be utilized as a primary treatment or in persistent, recurrent, or second primary OPSCC. There is emerging data showing improved functional outcomes with TORS versus open surgery or chemoradiation. Unfortunately, there have been no randomized trials comparing TORS to chemoradiation in HPV negative OPSCC. This article will review utility of TORS for HPV negative OPSCC.
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.