ArticleBMC cancer2024
Comparing long-term efficacy and safety of GP versus TPF sequential chemoradiotherapy for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanism-guided radiosensitization strategies for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Current evidence and translational perspectives (Review).Oncology letters · 2026Review
- Therapeutic Innovations in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Current Strategies and Emerging Perspectives.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Retrospective study on maintenance therapy with PD-1 inhibitor combined with S-1 or capecitabine after first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of GP and TPF sequential chemotherapy regimens in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC).
methodsFrom 2005 to 2016, a total of 408 LA-NPC patients treated with GP or TPF sequential chemoradiotherapy were retrospectively included. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) was employed to balance the baseline variables. Survival outcomes and acute toxicities were compared between both groups.
resultsA total of 230 patients were selected by 1:1 PSM. At a median follow-up of 91 months, no significant differences were observed between the matched GP and TPF groups regarding 5-year overall survival, progression-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and locoregionally relapse-free survival (83.4% vs. 83.4%, P = 0.796; 75.6% vs. 68.6%, P = 0.301; 86.7% vs. 81.1%, P = 0.096; and 87.4% vs. 87.2%, P = 0.721). Notable disparities in adverse effects were identified, with higher incidences of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in the GP group while grade 3/4 leukopenia and neutropenia in the TPF group. Though not recorded in our cohort, combined with the FAERS database, thrombotic adverse reactions are a concern for the GP regimen, while the TPF regimen requires vigilance for life-threatening adverse reactions such as septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and laryngeal edema.
conclusionNo significant difference in long-term outcomes was observed between the GP and TPF sequential chemotherapy regimens for LA-NPC. Differences in adverse effects should be noted when choosing the regimen.
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.