ArticleOral oncology2019
Priorities of human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer patients at diagnosis and after treatment.
Article in Oral oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survivors' perspectives on cisplatin-induced ototoxicity and barriers to ototoxicity monitoring.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Higher Prevalence of p16-Positive OPSCC Among Males in Northern Nevada: A Regional Epidemiological Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Beyond stage and HPV status: the evolving landscape and future of multidisciplinary deintensification in human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal cancer.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
- Patient experience and shared decision-making in HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer: A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative evidence.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2025Review
- Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Proton Therapy for Oropharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2023Review
- Development of a web-based, patient-centered decision aid for oropharyngeal cancer treatment.Oral oncology · 2021Article
- Assessing Preferences in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Phase I and II of Questionnaire Development.Cancers · 2020Article
- Value and Quality of Care in Head and Neck Oncology.Current oncology reports · 2020Review
- The Evolution of Care of Cancers of the Head and Neck Region: State of the Science in 2020.Cancers · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLittle is known regarding how human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer (HPV-OPC) patient goals change with treatment. This study evaluates whether patient ranking of non-oncologic priorities relative to cure and survival shift after treatment as compared to priorities at diagnosis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a prospective study of HPV-OPC patient survey responses at diagnosis and after treatment. The relative importance of 12 treatment-related priorities was ranked on an ordinal scale (1 as highest). Median rank (MR) was compared using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank tests. Prevalence of high concern for 11 treatment-related issues was compared using paired t-test. The effect of patient characteristics on change in priority rank and concern was evaluated using linear regression.
resultsAmong 37 patients, patient priorities were generally unchanged after treatment compared with at diagnosis, with cure and survival persistently ranked top priority. Having a moist mouth uniquely rose in importance after treatment. Patient characteristics largely did not affect change in priority rank. Concerns decreased after treatment, except concern regarding recurrence. DISCUSSION: Treatment-related priorities are largely similar at diagnosis and after treatment regardless of patient characteristics. The treatment experience does not result in a shift of priorities from cure and survival to non-oncologic domains over cure and survival. The rise in importance of moist mouth implies that xerostomia may have been underappreciated as a sequelae of treatment. A decrease in most treatment-related concerns is encouraging, whereas the persistence of specific areas of concern may inform patient counseling.
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.