Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37035145›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2023

Systematic review of craniofacial osteosarcoma regarding different clinical, therapeutic and prognostic parameters.

Verena Weber, Robert Stigler, Rainer Lutz, Marco Kesting, Manuel Weber

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Molecular Alterations in Osteosarcomas of the Oral and Maxillofacial Region: A Scoping Review.Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Verena WeberDepartment of Operative and Restorative Dentistry, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Robert StiglerDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Rainer LutzDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Marco KestingDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Manuel WeberDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEInnsbruck Medical University · ATUniversität Innsbruck · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Osteosarcomas are the most common primary bone tumor while occurrence in the craniofacial skeleton is relatively rare. There are clinical differences of osteosarcomas regarding their location. In this regard craniofacial osteosarcomas (COS) have special characteristics. Extracranial osteosarcomas (EOS) occur mainly in the long bones of the extremities (tibia, humerus and femur). These tumors metastasize hematogenically at a very early stage. In comparison, COS are mainly localized in the mandible and maxilla, occur later in life and show significantly less and later metastasis and respond differently to adjuvant therapy. In the literature, clinical characteristics of COS and EOS are rarely compared directly. The aim of this systematic review is to answer the question whether COS and EOS exhibit fundamentally different clinical behavior and how they differ in terms of survival rates and response to different therapies. Methods: A systemic review was performed. Pubmed, Cochrane and Google Scholar were used as search engines. The literature research was done by using clearly defined terms and their links. 124 full texts were selected and evaluated for this review. The inclusion criteria were determined using the PICO model. Results: COS have significantly better survival rates, especially if they are located in the jawbone. Surgical R0 resection is crucial for therapeutic success. The study situation regarding the benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in COS is very inhomogeneous. There is also no evidence for the benefit of adjuvant radio- or chemotherapy in COS. The large heterogeneity of the studies in terms of therapeutic concept, initial situation of the patients and outcome considered, as well as the small number of patients with craniofacial osteosarcoma were limiting factors. Conclusion: The results of this study show the clear therapeutic and prognostic differences between COS and EOS and underline the necessity to consider both types of osteosarcoma as independent tumor entities in future studies. Furthermore, the study highlights the importance of surgical R0 resection for the prognosis of COS patients. There is no evidence for therapeutic benefit of adjuvant/neoadjuvant radio-/chemotherapy in R0 resected COS cases.

Indexed as

chemotherapycraniofacial osteosarcomaextracranial osteosarcomahead and neck osteosarcomamaxillofacial bone sarcomaradiotherapysurgical therapysurvival

Identifiers

PMID37035145
PMCPMC10080080
OpenAlexW4360865667

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.