ReviewHNO2021
[De-escalation concepts for chemoradiotherapy of HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinomas: pros and cons].
Review in HNO, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenges and Considerations in Diagnosing and Managing p16+-Related Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (OPSCC) with Neck Metastasis: Implications of p16 Positivity, Tobacco Exposure, and De-Escalation Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Patterns-of-Care Analysis for Radiotherapy of Elderly Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients: A Trinational Survey in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- DNA damage response and potential biomarkers of radiosensitivity in head and neck cancers: clinical implications.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn contrast to alcohol- and nicotine-induced head and neck tumors, human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma rather affects younger patients, and the incidence of this entity is continuously increasing. Due to the significantly better prognosis of HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma, various treatment de-escalation strategies are currently being investigated, with the aim of reducing toxicity without affecting the good survival rates of these patients.
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the evidence for treatment de-escalation in HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma. MATERIALS AND
methodsA literature search was performed and relevant studies are critically discussed.
resultsDe-escalation strategies for HPV-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma using induction chemotherapy or radiation dose reduction have demonstrated good oncological results in phase II trials, with lower toxicity rates compared to historical controls. However, both of the first published phase III trials investigating de-escalation of concomitant chemotherapy regimens demonstrated inferior outcomes for the deescalated treatment strategies without improvements in treatment-associated toxicities. Additional phase-III trials investigating other de-escalation strategies have not yet been published.
conclusionTreatment de-escalation should be performed exclusively in prospective studies and can currently not be recommended in clinical routine.
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.