ArticleInfectious agents and cancer2024
Impact of plasma Epstein-Barr virus DNA in posttreatment nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Article in Infectious agents and cancer, 2024. 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is prevalent in southern China. EBV DNA is the most useful biomarker in NPC. However, the value of EBV DNA in posttreatment NPC patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains unclear.
methodsSixty-four eligible NPC patients were enrolled between December 2022 and February 2023. Patients who met the following criteria were included: had non-metastatic NPC, completed radical treatment, were first firstly infected with SARS-CoV-2 and their EBV DNA changed from undetectable to detectable.
resultsAt the end of follow-up, 81.25% (52/64) of patients were confirmed not to relapse with undetectable EBV DNA (no-relapse). In addition, 18.75% (12/64) of patients experienced relapse with consistent detection of EBV DNA (yes-relapse). For all 64 patients, the average time from diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to detection of detectable EBV DNA was 35.41 days (2 to 139 days). For 52 no-relapse patients, the average time from EBV DNA changing from detectable to undetectable was 63.12 days (6 to 147 days). The levels of EBV DNA were greater in yes-relapse patients than that in no-relapse patients, and the average of EBV DNA levels were 1216 copies/ml and 53.18 copies/ml, respectively. Using 62.3 copies/mL as the threshold, the area under the curve for EBV DNA was 0.88 for distinguishing yes-relapse patients from no-relapse patients. The sensitivity and specificity were 81.97% (95% CI 0.71-0.95) and 86.67% (95% CI 0.70-0.95), respectively.
conclusionFor NPC patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, EBV DNA alone is insufficient for monitoring relapse after radical therapy. Long-term follow-up and underlying mechanistic investigations of EBV DNA changes are urgently needed.
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.