ArticleCureus2017
First Clinical Report on Comparative Treatment and Survival Outcomes in Second Cancers after Primary Head and Neck Cancer: A Population-Based Study.
Article in Cureus, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence, treatment variation, and survival of synchronous head and neck and esophageal carcinomas: a descriptive nationwide cohort study in the Netherlands.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Screening for Second Primary Tumors of the Esophagus Among Head and Neck Cancer Patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Is there a patient population with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region who might benefit from de-intensification of postoperative radiotherapy? : A monocentric retrospective analysis of a previously defined low-risk patient population treated with standard-of-care radiotherapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTo compare patients' survival of second primary malignancy (SPM) after head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).
methodsThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was utilized (1973-2011). The Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test was used to compare the overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS) among treatment methods from the time of diagnosis of SPMs. Cox proportional regression models were used to adjust the impact for risk factors on CSS.
resultsA total of 3,038 patients were identified (5-yr OS 22.6% (21.0-24.3%)). For head and neck (HN) SPMs, the patients who received 'conservative surgery with radiation' had the best 5-yr OS (65.2% (48.9-86.9%)); and the 'conservative surgery' group had the best 5-yr CSS (89.9% (85.6-94.5%)). For lung SPMs, the 'radical surgery' group showed the best survival (2-yr OS 60.8% (56.0-66.1%), 2-yr CSS 70.6% (65.8-75.8%), respectively). Esophagus SPMs had poor prognosis, with no difference among the treatment groups. In lung SPMs, younger age (p<0.001) and black race (p<0.05) were most favorable CSS predictors.
conclusionsThe prognosis of SPMs after HNSCC is worse compared with corresponding primary tumor. Conservative surgery with or without radiation showed the most favorable outcomes in HN SPMs..
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.