ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2025
The Value of Orbital Exenteration for Eyelid Sebaceous Carcinoma in Stages II to IV: A Cohort Study of 78 Patients.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the prognosis of eyelid sebaceous carcinoma (SeC) in patients with disease stage worse than IIA. Methods: This retrospective, single-center study included 78 SeC patients. For stage II patients, 1:3 propensity score matching (PSM) was applied between those undergoing orbital exenteration and those receiving eye-sparing treatments. Risk factors in the eye-sparing group were analyzed using Cox regression, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis assessed metastasis-free survival (MFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Seventy-eight patients treated at Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, from January 2010 to July 2024, were followed for a median of 40.5 months. Of these, 60 patients (76.9%) had stage II disease, 13 patients (16.7%) had stage III, and five patients (6.4%) had stage IV. After PSM, patients with an advanced clinical T (cT) category (cT4 vs. cT3) or equatorial region involvement were more likely to require orbital exenteration and had poorer MFS following eye-sparing surgery. For stage II patients who died of tumor-related causes, the average survival was 144.3 months. For stage III patients with distant metastasis, survival post-metastasis averaged 12.5 months; for stage IV patients, the time from diagnosis to tumor-specific death averaged 49.0 months. Conclusions: In stage II SeC, eye-sparing treatment offered comparable outcomes to orbital exenteration. Orbital exenteration is recommended for tumor involved with the equatorial region. Systemic therapy may be beneficial for patients with distant metastases, although further research is needed to optimize adjuvant treatment.
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.