ArticleJAMA network open2020
Association of Type of Treatment Facility With Overall Survival After a Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of NDURE on Timely Adjuvant Radiotherapy in HNSCC: Subgroup Analysis of an RCT.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Patterns and Predictors of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Utilization in High- and Low-Risk Thin Melanomas.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Elective Neck Dissection in cT1-4 N0M0 Head and Neck Spindle Cell Carcinoma.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- Nodal metastasis in surgically treated sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Sociodemographic Disparities in Rectal Cancer Outcomes within Academic Cancer Centers.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Choice of Adjuvant Radiotherapy Facility in Sinonasal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Review of Current and Future Medical Treatments in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Cancers · 2024Review
- Comparison of surgical margins and adjuvant therapy for head and neck cancer by hospital type.Translational cancer research · 2024Article
- Article
- Increasing radiation therapy and lower survival for human papillomavirus-related oropharynx cancer associated with a shift to community cancer center care.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- Eugene Nicholas Myers' Lecture on Head and Neck Cancer, 2020: The Surgeon as a Prognostic Factor in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing Surgery.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2023Article
- Association of Social-Ecological Factors With Delay in Time to Initiation of Postoperative Radiation Therapy: A Prospective Cohort Study.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2023Article
- Impact of Treatment Modalities upon Survival Outcomes in Skull Base and Clival Chordoma: An NCDB Analysis.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2023Article
- The Utility of Oncology Information Systems for Prognostic Modelling in Head and Neck Cancer.Journal of medical systems · 2023Article
- Treatment selection towards active surveillance over definitive treatment for pituitary adenomas is influenced by sociodemographic factors.Clinical neurology and neurosurgery · 2022Article
- More than treatment refusal: a National Cancer Database analysis of adjuvant treatment refusal and racial survival disparities among women with endometrial cancer.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2022Article
- Prognosis of Distant Metastatic Sites in Anterior Skull Base Malignancies.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2022Article
- Primary Site and Other Prognostic Factors for Fibrosarcoma: An Analysis of the National Cancer Database.Cureus · 2021Article
- Socio-economic factors do not affect overall survival in soft tissue sarcoma when patients treated at a single high-volume center.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Factors Associated With the Choice of Radiation Therapy Treatment Facility in Head and Neck Cancer.The Laryngoscope · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Patients with head and neck cancer receive care at academic comprehensive cancer programs (ACCPs), integrated network cancer programs (INCPs), comprehensive community cancer programs (CCCPs), and community cancer programs (CCPs). The type of treatment facility may be associated with overall survival. Objective: To examine whether type of treatment facility is associated with overall survival after a diagnosis of head and neck cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study included patients from the National Cancer Database, a prospectively maintained, hospital-based cancer registry of patients treated at more than 1500 US hospitals. Participants were diagnosed with malignant tumors of the head and neck from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2016. Data were analyzed from May 1 through November 30, 2019. Exposures: Treatment at facilities classified as ACCPs, INCPs, CCCPs, or CCPs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival after diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer was the primary outcome. The secondary outcome was the odds of receiving treatment at ACCPs and INCPs vs CCCPs and CCPs. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression and univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used for analysis. Results: A total of 525 740 patients (368 821 men [70.2%]; mean [SD] age, 63.3 [14.0] years) were diagnosed with malignant tumors of the head and neck during the study period. Among them, 36 595 patients (7.0%) were treated at CCPs; 174 658 (33.2%), at CCCPs; 232 867 (44.3%), at ACCPs; and 57 857 (11.0%), at INCPs. The median survival for patients with aerodigestive cancers was 69.2 (95% CI, 68.6-69.8) months; salivary gland cancers, 107.2 (95% CI, 103.9-110.2) months; and skin cancers, 113.2 (95% CI, 111.4-114.6) months. Improved overall survival was associated with treatment at ACCPs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.88-0.91), INCPs (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96), and CCCPs (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.95) compared with CCPs. Compared with patients with private insurance, those with government insurance (odds ratio [OR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.29-1.41), no insurance (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.09-1.16), or Medicaid (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.14-1.20) were more likely to receive treatment at ACCPs and INCPs, whereas patients with Medicare were less likely to receive treatment at ACCPs and INCPs (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94-0.97). Compared with white patients, black (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.52-1.59) and Asian (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.49-1.63) patients were more likely to receive care at ACCPs and INCPs. Compared with patients from lower-income areas, patients from high-income areas were more likely to receive treatment at ACCPs and INCPs (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.22-1.28). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that treatment at ACCPs and INCPs was associated with a better overall survival rate in patients with head and neck cancer. Key social determinants of health such as race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and type of insurance were associated with receiving treatment at ACCPs and INCPs.
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.