Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36350358›Full record

ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2023

Traditional risk factors and nodal yield-still relevant with high-quality risk-adapted adjuvant treatment for locally advanced head and neck cancer?

Y Butt, P Tennstedt, C-J Busch, H Hanken, A Krüll, C Petersen, S Tribius

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Defining a minimum nodal yield for neck dissection in mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, a systematic review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Y ButtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
P TennstedtMartini Klinik, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
C-J BuschDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Center for Clinical Neurosciences, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
H HankenDepartment of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Center for Clinical Neurosciences University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
A KrüllDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
C PetersenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
S TribiusDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. s.tribius@asklepios.com.ORCID 0000-0001-7754-0257
Universität Hamburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePatients with locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) often undergo multimodal therapy including radical resection of the primary tumor and neck dissection (ND) followed by risk-adapted adjuvant radio(chemo)therapy (R(C)T). Quality parameters influencing local control and survival of these patients have been postulated: resection status (R status), extranodal extension (ENE), interval to adjuvant treatment ≤6 weeks, R(C)T given when indicated, and nodal yield (NY) ≥18 lymph nodes per neck. For other solid tumors the trend is towards less extensive lymph node surgery to avoid toxicity such as lymphedema, damage to peripheral nerves, dysesthesia, or paresthesia. The present study aims to investigate whether the number of nodes removed during neck dissection for LAHNC is still predictive for outcome when patients receive risk-adapted adjuvant treatment according to current guidelines.

methodsBetween 2008 and 2015, 468 patients with LAHNC undergoing R(C)T with curative intent were prospectively registered in a database (UICC III/IV). Among them, 359 patients received adjuvant treatment and 295 underwent neck dissection. There were 119 (40%) patients with an oropharyngeal primary, 49 (17%) with cancer of the larynx/hypopharynx, 88 (30%) of the oral cavity, and 39 (13%) of the nasal/paranasal sinuses and cancer of unknown primary (CUP). Median follow-up was 45.6 months. Histopathology revealed an R1 status in 65 (22%) cases and ENE in 93 (31%) cases. 150 (51%) patients received RCT; the median time to adjuvant treatment from the day of tumor resection was 44 days (35-54) and overall treatment time (OTT; time from surgery to the last day of R(C)T) was 90 days (82-101). Factors influencing disease-free survival (DFS) were adjusted and analyzed using CART analysis (removed nodes, number of positive nodes, body mass index (BMI), ENE, T and N classification, R status, and primary site). Local control (LC), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier statistics and multivariate analysis (MVA) for factors predictive for DFS and OS.

resultsCART analysis (Classification and Regression Trees) showed that T classification (T3/4) is the most important predictor for DFS, followed by age (> 61 years) and BMI (< 17.4). Primary site (OPC vs. other) and number of removed nodes (< 17) were shown to be less important for DFS, while ECE, N classification, and R status seem to be of little relevance. MVA revealed number of positive nodes, non-OPC, and T3/4 to be negative predictive factors for DFS. For OS, the number of positive nodes and non-OPC primary were predictive. Five-year rates were 86.1% for LC, 87.9% DMFS, 76.5% DFS, and 67.2% for OS.

conclusionIn this patient cohort, the number of removed nodes is not relevant for DFS and OS, while the number of positive nodes and T classification have a negative impact on these endpoints. The high-risk factors positive resection margin and ECE seem to lose their negative impact on DFS and OS. High-quality care in head and oncology is only possible within a close multidisciplinary team and network.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Squamous CellHead and Neck NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyDisease-Free SurvivalHumansLymph NodesMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsCART analysisNeck node dissectionNumber of resected nodesQuality of care

Identifiers

PMID36350358
OpenAlexW4308637694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.