ReviewCureus2025
Toxicity and Oncologic Outcomes of Proton Radiotherapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
Abstract
Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) is associated with acute and late toxicities that impact patient quality of life. Proton radiotherapy (PRT) can reduce exposure to surrounding tissues, but the clinical magnitude of this advantage is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Included studies reported toxicity or oncologic outcomes from patients treated with PRT for OPC. Pooled outcomes were estimated using random-effects models. Comparisons between PRT and IMRT were performed using log odds ratios. Primary outcomes were the pooled rates of adverse events, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 18 studies (16 retrospective, two prospective) consisting of 956 patients were identified. Pooled rates of acute grade 3+ toxicities were as follows: dermatitis 19%, mucositis 32%, xerostomia 1.3%, dysphagia 13%, and weight loss 1.4%. The pooled rate of acute hospitalizations was 10%. Among studies reporting late toxicities, the rates of grade 3+ xerostomia and dysphagia were 1.1% and 1.6%, respectively. Compared to IMRT, PRT was associated with lower rates of acute feeding tube use (21% versus 31%; P = 0.0012), but not long-term feeding tube use (1.4% versus 2.7%; P = 0.24). After PRT, OS at two and three years were 98% and 96%, while PFS at two and three years were 93% and 86%. PRT for patients with OPC is associated with favorable toxicity and oncologic outcomes. While randomized clinical trials are ongoing, these data provide additional evidence regarding the efficacy of PRT in the upfront treatment of OPC.
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.