ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Diving into hot topics of salivary gland carcinoma management-an EORTC young and early career investigator survey.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Recently, the ASCO and ESMO guidelines on salivary gland carcinomas (SGCs) have been released. However, several crucial points lack strong recommendations due to low or intermediate quality of evidence. To better address these "grey zones" in the guidelines, we conducted a survey among the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Head and Neck Cancer Group (HNCG) members on behalf of the EORTC young and early career investigators. Materials and methods: The survey included 29 questions addressing diagnostic and therapeutic issues related to SGC patients and was shared among 539 members of the EORTC HNCG. Responses were collected from December 2022 to March 2023. The primary aim was to evaluate the decision-making criteria guiding physicians in areas with low evidence in SGC guidelines. Results: With a response rate of 19%, the survey received input from 102 respondents, mainly medical oncologists (45%). Among those with pathological high-risk features, 35% and 30% of respondents opted for chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in the definitive and adjuvant settings, respectively. For patients with R0 resection of highly aggressive SGC at the pT1-2 stage, 37% proposed a close follow-up, while 38% proposed adjuvant lymph-node field RT. In cases of pT3-4 stage, 48% proposed adjuvant lymph-node field RT in all cases, and 44% proposed it based only on risk factors. The most important factors guiding the decision to give adjuvant RT after salvage surgery for locoregional relapse include previous radiotherapy, margin status, and the presence of extranodal extension. When faced with combined positivity to HER2 and AR, responses regarding the choice of first-line palliative treatment were heterogeneous. Conclusions: International guidelines lack strong recommendations in several fields of SGC diagnosis and treatment due to insufficient high-quality data, resulting in heterogeneity in physicians' treatment decision (e.g., adjuvant lymph-node field RT and their low concordance with guidelines, such as the use of concomitant CRT). The survey demonstrated the need for prospective clinical trial data to address these gaps in the future.
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.