ArticleThe British journal of radiology2019
Clinical significance of the post-radiotherapy
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prognostic value of radiomic features from pre- and post-treatmentScientific reports · 2023Trial
- Long-term outcomes and patient profiles following intensity-modulated radio-chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer in a nonendemic region.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- The role of PET/CT in radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Hopkins criteria for residual disease assessment after definitive radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Cancer medicine · 2020Article
- Advances in nasopharyngeal carcinomaThe British journal of radiology · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical significance of the post-radiotherapy
methodsWe reviewed 143 patients with nasopharyngeal cancer who underwent
resultsThe median follow-up period was 73 months (range, 9-182 months). Overall, 83 and 66% of patients achieved T-PET (-) and N-PET (-) responses, and the negative-predictive values (NPVs) for T- and N- were 100 and 99%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive-predictive value were 100, 84, and 8% for T-, and 67, 80, and 7% for N-, respectively. The 5-year OS, DMFS, and LRRFS rates were 83, 83, and 87%, respectively, and patients with N-PET (+) with SUV
conclusionIn patients that have received definitive (chemo)radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer, ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We found that post-radiotherapy
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.