ReviewOral diseases2025
Exploratory Advanced Radiotherapies for Ameloblastoma and Ameloblastic Carcinoma-A Concise Review.
Review in Oral diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAmeloblastoma is an aggressively growing odontogenic tumor with substantial management challenges and a high recurrence rate. Surgical resection is the treatment of choice for ameloblastoma, but adjuvant therapies like radiation have been explored in cases where surgery is not clinically advisable and the tumor is inoperable. This short review assessed ameloblastoma case reports for outcomes of advanced radiation therapy modalities.
methodsPubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were queried for outcomes of ameloblastoma treated with helical tomotherapy, gamma knife radiosurgery, proton beam therapy, and carbon ion therapy. Patient outcomes were assessed based on tumor response, radiation side effects, and tumor recurrence.
resultsSeven of nine (78%) cases showed tumor regression or complete response, with no disease progression during follow-up that ranged from 3 months to 5 years. The remaining two had partial regression or stable disease. Treatment side effects were generally mild, with 6 cases reporting grade 1-3 dermatitis, mucositis, or xerostomia. Two cases experienced severe toxicity, including grade 3 mucositis and radiation retinopathy.
conclusionAdvanced radiation techniques offer a promising alternative or adjuvant therapy for ameloblastoma in cases where surgery is contraindicated. However, more studies are needed to validate these findings.
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.