Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31200353›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN2019

Neoadjuvant or Adjuvant Chemotherapy Plus Concurrent CRT Versus Concurrent CRT Alone in the Treatment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Study Based on EBV DNA.

Li-Ting Liu, Qiu-Yan Chen, Lin-Quan Tang, Shan-Shan Guo, Ling Guo, Hao-Yuan Mo, Yang Li, Qing-Nan Tang, Xue-Song Sun, Yu-Jing Liang and 10 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Nomogram for distant metastasis-free survival in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Metastatic disease in head & neck oncology.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Li-Ting LiuState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Qiu-Yan ChenState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Lin-Quan TangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Shan-Shan GuoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Ling GuoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Hao-Yuan MoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Yang LiState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Qing-Nan TangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Xue-Song SunState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Yu-Jing LiangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Chong ZhaoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Xiang GuoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Chao-Nan QianState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Mu-Sheng ZengState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Jin-Xin BeiState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Ming-Huang HongState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Jian-Yong ShaoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Ying SunState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Jun MaState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
Hai-Qiang MaiState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine.
State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe goal of this study was to explore the value of adding neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) or adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) to concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) with different risks of treatment failure. PATIENTS AND

methodsA total of 2,263 eligible patients with stage III-IVb NPC treated with CCRT ± NACT or ACT were included in this retrospective study. Distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival, and progression-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and differences were compared using the log-rank test.

resultsPatients in the low-risk group (stage N0-1 disease and Epstein-Barr virus [EBV] DNA <4,000 copies/mL) who received NACT followed by CCRT achieved significantly better 5-year DMFS than those treated with CCRT alone (96.2% vs 91.3%; P= .008). Multivariate analyses also demonstrated that additional NACT was the only independent prognostic factor for DMFS (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.80; P=.009). In both the intermediate-risk group (stage N0-1 disease and EBV DNA ≥4,000 copies/mL and stage N2-3 disease and EBV DNA <4,000 copies/mL) and the high-risk group (stage N2-3 disease and EBV DNA ≥4,000 copies/mL), comparison of NACT or ACT + CCRT versus CCRT alone indicated no significantly better survival for all end points.

conclusionsThe addition of NACT to CCRT could reduce distant failure in patients with low risk of treatment failure.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemoradiotherapyDisease-Free SurvivalDNA, ViralEpstein-Barr Virus InfectionsFemaleHerpesvirus 4, HumanHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNasopharyngeal CarcinomaNasopharyngeal NeoplasmsDNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID31200353
OpenAlexW2952418172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.