Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34692495›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021

Outcomes of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients Treated With Salvage Surgery: A Meta-Analysis.

Yekai Feng, Zhimei Dai, Ruicheng Yan, Feng Li, Xiaosheng Zhong, Haoxin Ye, Caiqing Chen, Shaochong Fan, Cheng Qing, Yong Pan and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Yekai FengDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Zhimei DaiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Ruicheng YanDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Feng LiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Zhanjiang, China.
Xiaosheng ZhongDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Haoxin YeDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Caiqing ChenDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Shaochong FanDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Cheng QingDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Yong PanDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Forth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Haiying SunDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University · CNGuangzhou Medical University · CNAffiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical College Hospital · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University · CNHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CNUnion Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the efficacy of treatment outcomes of salvage surgery for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (rNPC).

methodsWe conducted a detailed search of the literatures in biomedical databases published from January 1990 to December 2020. The main research features and results of interest were retrieved from the articles that met the selection criteria for meta-analysis.

resultsA total of 21 articles with 778 patients were included, 17 of which met the meta-analysis inclusion criteria. The pooled 2-year overall survival (OS), 5-year OS, and 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) were 71%, 50% and 61%, respectively. Subgroup analysis was conducted with postoperative adjuvant therapy. The pooled 2-year OS, 5-year OS and 2-year DFS of the postoperative adjuvant therapy group compared with the surgery alone group were 69% vs 72%, 44% vs 56%, and 77% vs 54%, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on 178 patients with detailed individual postoperative survival data in 10 articles. On multivariate analysis, recurrent T (RT) stage and adjuvant therapy were independent predictors of outcomes.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis indicated that recurrent NPC patients can obtain survival benefits from salvage surgery. Accurately assessing the RT stage of the tumor and choosing the appropriate surgical method are important to the success of the surgery. Although the prognostic factors influencing outcome have been studied, conclusive data on the survival benefits are still lacking. Random controlled trials (RCTs) to compare surgery alone and postoperative adjuvant therapy are needed in patients with positive margin status after salvage surgery.

Indexed as

adjuvant therapymeta-analysisoutcomerecurrent nasopharyngeal carcinomasurgery

Identifiers

PMID34692495
PMCPMC8531649
OpenAlexW3202505594

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.