ArticleCureus2023
Impact of P16 Positivity on Clinical Outcomes in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Single Institution Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a rare malignancy with unique geographical distribution. It is prevalent in East and Southeast Asia and rare in non-endemic countries like the USA. P16 is a tumor suppressor gene and there are limited studies with inconsistent results describing the association of its positivity in immunohistochemistry and clinical outcomes. In this retrospective study, we compared progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) based on p16 positivity in 60 patients with NPC. Materials and methods Patients aged above 18 years and followed between July 2015 and December 2020 were included in the study. P16 positivity was based on the immunohistochemistry of the biopsy sample. We compared PFS and OS among all p16-positive and negative patients, and then among patients with advanced disease (stage III or IV), and between p16-positive, negative, and unknown status patients. Results There were 15 p16-positive, and 28 p16-negative, with a median age of 54.3 years and 55.7 years respectively. Most patients in both groups were male, Caucasian, and had advanced disease (stage III or stage IV). Both median PFS (p=0.838) and OS (p=0.776) were 84 months in the p16-negative group but were not reached during the study period in the p16-positive group. Among advanced-stage patients, the PFS (p=0.873), and OS (p=0.773) of both groups were not statistically significant. P16 status was unknown for 17 patients, and PFS (p=0.785) and OS (p=0.901), when compared among patients with p16-positive, negative, and unknown status, were also statistically non-significant. Discussion and conclusion Our analysis suggests that p16 status does not predict clinical outcomes in NPC patients. Our sample size was limited but is larger than most studies describing this association. With different studies in the literature reporting disparate findings, we recommend larger prospective studies to better illustrate the impact of p16 positivity on clinical outcomes in NPC.
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.