ArticleCancer medicine2024
Comparing the clinical outcomes of initial surgery and primary definitive radiotherapy with a dosage of 6600 cGy or higher in cT1-2N0M0 oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: A nationwide cohort study.
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 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.
- Article
- 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
31 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the clinical outcomes of two treatment modalities, initial surgery and primary definitive radiotherapy (RT), in Taiwanese patients diagnosed with cT1-2N0M0 oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC).
methodsBetween 2011 and 2019, we analyzed data for 13,542 cT1-2N0M0 patients who underwent initial surgery (n = 13,542) or definitive RT with a dosage of at least 6600 cGy (n = 145) for the treatment of OCSCC. To account for baseline differences, we employed propensity score (PS) matching, resulting in two well-balanced study groups (initial surgery, n = 580; definitive RT, n = 145).
resultsBefore PS matching, the 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rates were 88% for the surgery group and 58% for the RT group. After PS matching, the 5-year DSS rates of the two groups were 86% and 58%, respectively. Similarly, the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates before PS matching were 80% for the surgery group and 36% for the RT group, whereas after PS matching, they were 73% and 36%, respectively. All these differences were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). A multivariable analysis identified treatment with RT, older age, stage II tumors, and a higher burden of comorbidities as independent risk factors for both DSS and OS. We also examined the 5-year outcomes for various subgroups (margin ≥5 mm, margin <5 mm, positive margins, RT combined with chemotherapy, and RT alone) as follows: DSS, 89%/88%/79%/63%/51%, respectively, p < 0.0001; OS, 82%/79%/68%/39%/32%, respectively, p < 0.0001.
conclusionsIn Taiwanese patients with cT1-2N0M0 OCSCC, a remarkably low proportion (1.1%) completed definitive RT. A significant survival disparity of 30% was observed between patients who underwent initial surgery and those who received definitive RT. Interestingly, even patients from the surgical group with positive surgical margins exhibited a significantly superior survival compared to those in the definitive RT group.
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.