ArticleCancer medicine2024
Prognostic factors in surgically treated tongue squamous cell carcinoma in stage T1-2N0-1M0: A retrospective analysis.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel patient-derived tongue squamous cell carcinoma cell lines from non-smokers: 3D and in vivo models for drug response studies.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2026Article
- Prognostic factors and cervical lymph node management in tongue squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Article
- A SEER-based prognostic nomogram for early-stage (pT1-2N0M0) tongue squamous cell carcinoma and an observational analysis of postoperative radiotherapy.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Observational
- Primary vs. second primary cT1-T2 oral squamous cell carcinoma: comparing the outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Prognostic factors in surgically treated tongue squamous cell carcinoma in stage T1-2N0-1M0: A retrospective analysis.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe study aimed to retrospectively identify the prognostic factors of surgically treated primary tongue squamous cell carcinoma (TSCC) cases and assess the benefits of surgical neck lymph node dissection (LND) in early-stage cancer.
methodsPatients with primary TSCC with pT1-2N0-1M0 stage without distant metastasis who were treated with surgery during 2014-2016 at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University were included. Univariate and multivariate Cox models were constructed to explore prognostic factors of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). Sub-group analysis was used to assess the effect of adjuvant therapy and the prognostic value of LND for the early-stage patients.
resultsIn total, 440 patients met the inclusion criteria. During the follow-up period, the 5-year OS, DFS, were 84.4% and 70.0%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that TNM stage, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and/or perineural invasion (PNI), pathological differentiation, etc. were significant predictors of OS and DFS. Multivariate analysis showed that TNM stage and the degree of pathological differentiation were independent prognostic factors for all outcomes. Besides, the number of cervical LND could independently predict both DFS and LRFS while LVI/PNI were associated with DFS. And high-quality neck LND (≥30) significantly improved DFS and LRFS for patients of pT1cN0M0 or stage I as compared to those without LND.
conclusionsTNM stage and pathological differentiation were crucial prognostic factors for postoperative patients with TSCC. Notably, high-quality cervical LND was beneficial for the improvement of DFS and LRFS for patients of pT1cN0M0 or stage I.
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.