ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
Comparison of Survival Outcomes of Different Treatment Options for cT1-2, N0 Glottic Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidelines for the Treatment of Laryngeal Cancer from the Korean Society of Head and Neck Surgery.Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2025Guideline
- Nomogram for predicting early death in elderly patients with laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based SEER study.PloS one · 2024Article
- COAmerican journal of translational research · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Treatments for cT1-2, N0 glottic squamous cell carcinoma (GLSCC) include endoscopic resection, open surgery, and radiotherapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of three treatment modalities and provide reference data for treatment selection. Methods: In all, 4274 patients with cT1-2, N0 GLSCC underwent these three treatment modalities from 2004 to 2015 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-18 database. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) of patients treated with the three modalities were compared. Results: In the entire cohort, there were no significant differences in 5-year OS and 5-year DSS among the three treatment groups. In subgroup analyses based on stage and age, endoscopic resection provided significantly better 5-year survival than radiotherapy for cT1, N0 patients aged <65 years, with an OS rate of 89.0% vs. 82.3% ( Conclusions: To summarize, for cT1, N0 GLSCC patients younger than 65 years, surgical treatment (either endoscopic or open) appears to be superior to the radiotherapy, and endoscopic resection should probably be the first consideration.
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.