ReviewHead & face medicine2021
Biological consequences of cancer radiotherapy in the context of oral squamous cell carcinoma.
Review in Head & face medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- In vitro determination of patient-specific variation challenges the universal RBE gold standard for proton radiation therapy.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio Might Serve as a Prognostic Marker in Young Patients with Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Targeting hexokinase 2 for oral cancer therapy: structure-based design and validation of lead compounds.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Matrix Metalloproteinases and Their Inhibitors as Potential Prognostic Biomarkers in Head and Neck Cancer after Radiotherapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- Tumour Genetic Heterogeneity in Relation to Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Anti-Cancer Treatment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- C10orf55, CASC2, and SFTA1P lncRNAs Are Potential Biomarkers to Assess Radiation Therapy Response in Head and Neck Cancers.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Approximately 50% of subjects with cancer have been treated with ionizing radiation (IR) either as a curative, adjuvant, neoadjuvant or as a palliative agent, at some point during the clinical course of their disease. IR kills cancer cells directly by injuring their DNA, and indirectly by inducing immunogenic cell killing mediated by cytotoxic T cells; but it can also induce harmful biological responses to non-irradiated neighbouring cells (bystander effect) and to more distant cells (abscopal effect) outside the primary tumour field of irradiation.Although IR can upregulate anti-tumour immune reactions, it can also promote an immunosuppressive tumour microenvironment. Consequently, radiotherapy by itself is seldom sufficient to generate an effective long lasting immune response that is capable to control growth of metastasis, recurrence of primary tumours and development of second primary cancers. Therefore, combining radiotherapy with the use of immunoadjuvants such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, can potentiate IR-mediated anti-tumour immune reactions, bringing about a synergic immunogenic cell killing effect.The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss some aspects of IR-induced biological responses, including factors that contributes to tumour radiosensitivity/radioresistance, immunogenic cell killing, and the abscopal effect.
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.