ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2023
A comparison between p16-positive head and neck cancer of unknown primary (HPV-HNCUP) and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-OPSCC): are they the same disease?
Article in 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oncogenic viruses and their role in oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- The Next Chapter in Cancer Diagnostics: Advances in HPV-Positive Head and Neck Cancer.Biomolecules · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe following study aimed to answer the question if HPV-HNCUP and HPV-OPSCC are the same disease. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare the oncological outcomes of both groups, in particular the 5-year overall survival rate (OS), the 5-year disease specific survival rate (DSS) and the 5-year progression free survival rate (PFS). MATERIALS AND
methodsFirstly, between January 1st, 2007, and March 31st, 2020 a total of 131 patients were treated with HNCUP at our Department. Out of these, 21 patients with a confirmed positive p16 status were referred to surgery followed by adjuvant therapy. Secondly, between January 1st, 2000, and January 31st, 2017, a total of 1596 patients were treated with an OPSSC at our Department. Out of these, 126 patients with a confirmed positive p16 status were referred to surgery followed by adjuvant therapy. After PSM, 84 patients with HPV-OPSCC and 21 HPV-HNCUP remained in the study for further comparison.
resultsThe OS was 63.5% (95% CI 39.4-87.6) for HPV-HNCUP and 88.9% (95% CI 90.4-100.0) for HPV-OPSCC patients and therefore, significantly lower for the first mentioned (p = 0.013). The DSS was also significantly impaired for HPV-HNCUP (71.0%, 95% CI 46.3-95.7), in comparison with HPV-OPSCC patients (95.5%, 95% CI 90.4-100.0; p = 0.002). The PFS for HPV-HNCUP patients was lower (75.6%, 95% CI 54.0-97.2) yet not significantly different to HPV-OPSCC (90.4%, 95% CI 83.5-97.3; p = 0.067).
conclusionsThe results presented demonstrate a significant reduced OS and DSS for HPV-HNCUP patients. Accordingly, in our study HPV-HNCUP and HPV-OPSCC are two different entities with a different oncological outcome.
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.