ArticleNational journal of maxillofacial surgery
NIRADS-based case assessment of post-treatment head and neck cancer and its clinical correlation: A validation study.
Article in National journal of maxillofacial surgery. 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.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of PET/CT and Diffusion-weighted MRI in Detecting Residual Oropharyngeal Carcinoma after Chemoradiotherapy.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Article
- Early post-operative NI-RADS predicts recurrence and survival in high-risk oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- FAPI-positron emission tomography for radiotherapy in head and neck cancer: applications and future directions.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The neck imaging reporting and data system (NIRADS) lexicon is aimed at surveillance of head and neck cancer during post-treatment follow-up using either a CECT or PET-CT scan. These recommendations standardize management, reduce interobserver variability, and standardizes scientific communication. Objectives: The primary aim of this study was to validate the correlation between the NI-RADS category and disease status on clinical follow-up and histopathological analysis. The other objective was to assess the status of primary as well as nodal site at least 8 to 12 weeks after definitive treatment on first post-treatment imaging as per NI-RADS. Materials and Methods: We did a retrospective review of maintained a database of patients treated with curative intent radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. The diagnostic accuracy of NIRADS was compared with the clinical follow-up and histopathological findings. Data was recorded using the NIRADS lexicon and analyzed using SPSS 25. Result: In our study, 37 cases were followed with CECT, whereas 111 were followed with PET-CT. We observed no significant difference between CECT and PET-CT for predicting recurrence in any of the NIRADS category. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy of NIRADS to predict recurrence for the primary site is 61.54%, 75.21%, 34.8%, 90.1%, and 72.79%, respectively, whereas for the neck, it is 69.54%, 75.41%, 37.5%, 92%, and 74.32%. Conclusion: NIRADS score is strongly associated with positive disease in as Neck as well as primary. Increased use of NIRADS will lead to a uniform reporting system and improved patient outcome.
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.