ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2025
Clinical landscape for patients with head and neck cancers enrolled in phase I trials at a tertiary referral center.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recent advances in understanding the biology of cancer have resulted in an extensive armamentarium of new therapeutic agents, most often tested on various tumor types at the earliest stages of drug development. However, the clinical impact of these therapies on patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) remains underexplored and requires further evaluation. Objectives: To investigate the clinical outcomes and toxicity profiles of patients with HNC enrolled in phase I trials (Ph1t) at a tertiary referral center over the last decade. Design: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, analyzing data from HNC patients enrolled in phase I trials at the Curie Institute between October 2011 and January 2024. Methods: Data on baseline characteristics, hematologic biomarkers, and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Objective response rate (ORR) and Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. A Cox model was used for the identification of prognostic factors. Results: One hundred and thirty patients were enrolled in Ph1t for recurrent/metastatic (R/M) setting (66.9%), including 20.8% of patients being treated with more than two lines of therapy, followed by locally advanced (LA) treated with radical surgery or exclusive chemo/radiotherapy (17.7%), neoadjuvant (10.0%), and adjuvant (5.4%) Ph1t. Patients were treated with immunotherapy (53.8%), targeted therapy (23.1%), bispecific antibody (8.5%), antibody-drug conjugate (4.6%), and other agents (10.0%). In 122 patients evaluable for response, ORR were 16.5%, 87.0%, and 92.3% in R/M, LA, and neoadjuvant Ph1t, respectively. Median PFS/OS rates were 2.0/8.3, 21.5/38.3, and 20.0/27.4 months in R/M, LA, and neoadjuvant Ph1t, respectively.At multivariable analysis, lower lymphocytes (HR = 0.144; 95% CI: 0.052-0.399; Conclusion: HNC Ph1t show encouraging results in terms of early efficacy signals and safety profiles, emphasizing their value across a variety of clinical settings.
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.