ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2025
Comparative Outcomes of Surgical vs. Non-Surgical Interventions in Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Large-Scale Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2025. 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.
- Non-Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oropharynx: Primary Surgery or (Chemo)radiotherapy?Head & neck · 2026Review
- Comparative evaluation of non-surgical and surgical treatment modalities for oral cancer.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Comparative Outcomes of Surgical vs. Non-Surgical Interventions in Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Large-Scale Retrospective Cohort Study.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare short-term complications and long-term survival outcomes between surgical and non-surgical treatments for oropharyngeal cancer. Methods: We conducted a large-scale retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, analyzing data from 154,494,403 patients across 128 healthcare organizations. After applying inclusion criteria and propensity score matching, we compared 2413 surgical patients with 2413 non-surgical patients. Primary outcomes included short-term complications at 6 months (dysphagia, gastrostomy tube placement, tracheostomy, respiratory complications) and 5-year all-cause mortality. Results: At 6 months post-treatment, surgical patients showed higher rates of dysphagia (46.83% vs. 40.61%, RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08-1.23) and respiratory complications (6.30% vs. 3.69%, RR = 1.71, 95% CI: 1.32-2.21). Non-surgical patients experienced increased rates of gastrostomy tube placement (17.86% vs. 6.09%, RR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.29-0.41) and tracheostomy (7.34% vs. 3.61%, RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.38-0.63). Similarly, subgroup analysis of the advanced-stage cohort showed that non-surgical patients had higher rates of gastrostomy tube placement (5.5% vs. 17.5%, RR = 0.31, CI: 0.19-0.52) and tracheostomy (3.1% vs. 6.4%, RR = 0.48, CI: 0.23-0.99). At 5-year follow-up, surgical intervention was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (9.9% vs. 25.3%, HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.37-0.49). This survival benefit persisted in the advanced-stage subgroup (14.1% vs. 25.5%, HR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.37-0.76) ( Conclusions: While surgical treatment for oropharyngeal cancer was associated with higher rates of certain short-term complications, it demonstrated superior long-term survival outcomes compared to non-surgical interventions, including in patients with advanced disease. These findings provide valuable evidence to inform treatment selection and patient counseling in oropharyngeal cancer management. Level of Evidence: 2b.
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.