ArticleBMC cancer2021
Comparing the 7th and 8th editions of UICC/AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the IMRT era.
Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ophthalmic manifestations of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC): A systematic review of reported cases with and without prior history of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia · 2024Pooled it
- Prognostic value of tumour-stroma ratio in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a two-center retrospective study.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Impact of magnetic resonance imaging-defined sarcopenia on prognosis in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Enhanced detection of skull-base bone invasion in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: the supplementary diagnostic value ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Role of PET/CT in improving the cost effectiveness of nimotuzumab in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2024Article
- Precision Medicine for Nasopharyngeal Cancer-A Review of Current Prognostic Strategies.Cancers · 2024Review
- Deletion of concurrent chemotherapy on the basis of sequential chemoradiotherapy for non-metastatic stage T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma in IMRT era.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- The Utility ofClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2024Article
- Regional lymph node density-based nomogram predicts prognosis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients without distant metastases.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023Article
- Treating radiation‑related nasopharyngeal necrosis with endostar in patient with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A report of two cases and a literature review.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Long-term Outcomes of Bevacizumab and Chemoradiation for Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Prognostic Value of Lymph Node Necrosis at Different N Stages in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.Journal of Cancer · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the prognostic value of 7th and 8th editions of the Union for International Cancer Control/American Joint Committee on Cancer (UICC/AJCC) staging system for patients with nonmetastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy and simultaneous integrated boost- intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SIB-IMRT).
methodsPatients with NPC (n = 300) who received SIB-IMRT were included. Survival by T-classification, N-classification, and stage group of each staging system was assessed.
resultsFor T-classification, nonsignificant difference was observed between T1 and T3 and between T2 and T3 disease (P = 0.066 and 0.106, respectively) for overall survival (OS) in the 7th staging system, whereas all these differences were significant in the 8th staging system (all P < 0.05). The survival curves for disease-free survival (DFS) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) in both staging systems were similar, except for the comparison of T2 and T4 disease for LRRFS (P = 0.070 for 7th edition; P = 0.011 for 8th edition). For N-classification, significant differences were observed between N2 and N3 diseases after revision (P = 0.046 and P = 0.043 for OS and DFS, respectively). For staging system, no significant difference was observed between IVA and IVB of 7th edition.
conclusionThe 8th AJCC staging system appeared to have superior prognosis value in the SIB-IMRT era compared with the 7th edition.
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.