ArticleOncotarget2017
Validation of the 8th edition of the UICC/AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy.
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epstein-Barr virus-positive small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the nasopharynx: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Enhancing Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Survival Prediction: Integrating Pre- and Post-Treatment MRI Radiomics with Clinical Data.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- Multi‑parameter quantitative magnetic resonance imaging in the early assessment of radiation‑induced parotid damage in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma following intensity‑modulated radiotherapy.Oncology letters · 2024Article
- Precision Medicine for Nasopharyngeal Cancer-A Review of Current Prognostic Strategies.Cancers · 2024Review
- Impact of independent multidisciplinary work on the survival rate of stage 3 and 4 nasopharyngeal cancer in Indonesia: a retrospective cohort study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Long-term Therapeutic Outcome and Prognostic Factors of Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Receiving Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy: An Analysis of 608 Patients from Low-endemic Regions of China.Current medical science · 2021Article
- HOXA11-AS induces cisplatin resistance by modulating the microRNA-98/PBX3 axis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Oncology letters · 2021Article
- Radiomics on multi-modalities MR sequences can subtype patients with non-metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) into distinct survival subgroups.European radiology · 2019Article
- Treatment Response Prediction of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Based on Histogram Analysis of Diffusional Kurtosis Imaging.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2019Article
- A simplified T classification based on the 8th edition of the UICC/AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Cancer management and research · 2019Article
- 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
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An accurate TNM staging system is crucial for treatment guidance and prognosis prediction in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the 8th edition of the Union for International Cancer Control/American Joint Committee on Cancer (UICC/AJCC) staging system for NPC treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). A total of 608 patients with biopsy-proven, non-metastatic NPC, treated with IMRT between January 2008 and March 2010, were enrolled. The 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local relapse-free survival (LRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates were 81.5%, 80.1%, 86.0%, and 81.1%, respectively. The LRFS rates of patients with stages T1 vs. T2, T2 vs. T3, and T1 vs. T3 did not differ between the 7th and 8th editions. By contrast, the DMFS rates of patients with N0 vs. N1, N1 vs. N2, and N2 vs. N3 differed between the 8th and the 7th editions, though no difference was observed between N3a and N3b, according to the 7th edition. The difference in OS between stages II and III, and between stages III and IVa, was larger according to the 8th edition than the 7th edition. There was no difference in the OS between stages I and II. These data indicate that in the IMRT era, the 8th edition staging system can predict the prognosis of NPC patients more accurately than the 7th edition.
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.