ArticleCancer2019
Individualized survival prediction for patients with oropharyngeal cancer in the human papillomavirus era.
Article in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review of prognostic models for predicting recurrence and survival in patients with treated oropharyngeal cancer.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Deep learning model using contrast-enhanced CT for predicting overall survival in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective multicenter study.European radiology · 2026Article
- Advancing Head and Neck Cancer Survival Prediction via Multi-Label Learning and Deep Model Interpretation.ArXiv · 2024Article
- Vision Transformer-Based Multilabel Survival Prediction for Oropharynx Cancer After Radiation Therapy.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024Article
- Identification of an individualized therapy prognostic signature for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- Head and neck cancer predictive risk estimator to determine control and therapeutic outcomes of radiotherapy (HNC-PREDICTOR): development, international multi-institutional validation, and web implementation of clinic-ready model-based risk stratification for head and neck cancer.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2023Article
- Development of a prognostic model of overall survival in oropharyngeal cancer from real-world data: PRO.M.E.THE.O.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2022Review
- Predicting local persistence/recurrence after radiation therapy for head and neck cancer from PET/CT using a multi-objective, multi-classifier radiomics model.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Accounting for not-at-random missingness through imputation stacking.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
- Development and Assessment of a Model for Predicting Individualized Outcomes in Patients With Oropharyngeal Cancer.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Article
- Epigenetic prediction of complex traits and mortality in a cohort of individuals with oropharyngeal cancer.Clinical epigenetics · 2020Article
- Hippo Pathway and YAP Signaling Alterations in Squamous Cancer of the Head and Neck.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- Individualized prognostic calculators in the precision oncology era.Oncotarget · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate, individualized prognostication in patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is vital for patient counseling and treatment decision making. With the emergence of human papillomavirus (HPV) as an important biomarker in OPSCC, calculators incorporating this variable have been developed. However, it is critical to characterize their accuracy prior to implementation.
methodsFour OPSCC calculators were identified that integrate HPV into their estimation of 5-year overall survival. Treatment outcomes for 856 patients with OPSCC who were evaluated at a single institution from 2003 through 2016 were analyzed. Predicted survival probabilities were generated for each patient using each calculator. Calculator performance was assessed and compared using Kaplan-Meier plots, receiver operating characteristic curves, concordance statistics, and calibration plots.
resultsCorrelation between pairs of calculators varied, with coefficients ranging from 0.63 to 0.90. Only 3 of 6 pairs of calculators yielded predictions within 10% of each other for at least 50% of patients. Kaplan-Meier curves of calculator-defined risk groups demonstrated reasonable stratification. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.74 to 0.80, and concordance statistics ranged from 0.71 to 0.78. Each calculator demonstrated superior discriminatory ability compared with clinical staging according to the seventh and eighth editions of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual. Among models, the Denmark calculator was found to be best calibrated to observed outcomes.
conclusionsExisting calculators exhibited reasonable estimation of survival in patients with OPSCC, but there was considerable variability in predictions for individual patients, which limits the clinical usefulness of these calculators. Given the increasing role of personalized treatment in patients with OPSCC, further work is needed to improve accuracy and precision, possibly through the identification and incorporation of additional biomarkers.
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.