SynthesisMedicine2019
Oncologic outcomes of IMRT versus CRT for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrated clinical-radiomic model for predicting treatment response of concurrent chemo-radiotherapy and radiotherapy alone in controversial subgroup of AJCC/UICC ninth edition stage I nasopharyngeal cancer.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2025Article
- Predicting the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients: an MRI radiomics and machine learning approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Radiation techniques and advancements in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Oral oncology · 2024Review
- Article
- Article
- Effect of radiotherapy interruption on nasopharyngeal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) Epithelial Associated Malignancies: Exploring Pathologies and Current Treatments.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Article
- Organs-at-risk dose constraints in head and neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy using a dataset from a multi-institutional clinical trial (JCOG1015A1).Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2022Article
- The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2021Article
- The prognostic significance of race in nasopharyngeal carcinoma by histological subtype.Head & neck · 2021Article
- Research status and prospects of biomarkers for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the era of high‑throughput omics (Review).International journal of oncology · 2021Review
- Epigallocatechin-3-Gallate Protects Pro-Acinar Epithelia Against Salivary Gland Radiation Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a prevalent malignancy in Asia particularly southern China. Comparisons of outcomes of conformal radiotherapy (CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) have been still debated. This meta-analysis was carried out to compare oncologic outcomes of CRT and IMRT in the treatment of NPC.
methodsA literature search was performed through PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library databases from their inceptions to November 10, 2018. Two authors assessed the included studies and extracted data independently. Relative studies that compared oncologic outcomes between CRT and IMRT for NPC were included.
resultsA total of 13 eligible studies were included, which contained 1 RCT, 1 prospective study, and 11 retrospective studies. Our meta-analysis showed that IMRT has increased overall survival (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.41-0.65, P < .00001), locoregional control rate (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.52-0.67, P < .00001), disease-free survival (OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.65-0.91, P = .002), and metastasis-free survival (OR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.54-0.94, P = .01) in comparison with CRT.
conclusionThe results of this meta-analysis indicate IMRT should be a better option for the treatment of NPC because patients who underwent IMRT may benefit from increased overall survival, locoregional control rate, disease-free survival, and metastasis-free survival compared with CRT.
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.