Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41680505›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026

Does the site of origin of mucoepidermoid carcinoma impact treatment outcomes? Long-term analysis of 244 patients over a decade.

Smriti Panda, Karthika Chettuvatti, Rajeev Kumar, Alok Thakar, Kapil Sikka, Chirom Amit Singh, Rakesh Kumar, Rachit Sood, Thalhath A Salam, Kavneet Kaur and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Smriti PandaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, National Cancer Institute-AIIMS, New Delhi, India. smriti.panda.87@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1257-8611
Karthika ChettuvattiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Rajeev KumarDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Alok ThakarDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Kapil SikkaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Chirom Amit SinghDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Rakesh KumarDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Rachit SoodDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Thalhath A SalamDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Kavneet KaurDepartment of Pathology, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Aman SharmaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Institute, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Akash KumarDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Ahitagni BiswasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, BRAIRCH, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Suman BhaskarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, BRAIRCH, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Aanchal KakkarDepartment of Pathology, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) is the most common malignant histology encountered in salivary glands. Due to the rarity of salivary gland malignancies and more than 20 different histological types, there is a need to analyse clinicopathological risk factors of each histology separately, with emphasis on long-term outcomes.

methodsRetrospective cohort study from a tertiary care centre conducted from 2014 to 2024 on all histologically confirmed MEC that underwent upfront surgery.

results244 MEC [major salivary gland (MASG)-153, minor salivary gland (MISG)-91] were available for analysis. The median follow-up was 39 months. Location in MISG, higher T category and female sex were independent prognostic variables for survival on multivariate analysis (MVA) of the entire cohort. The impact of tumour location persisted following matched-pair analysis controlling for tumour stage, grade and margin status (OS: HR:5.3, 95% CI: 2.1 to 12.9; DFS: HR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.2 to 5.8). The predominant pattern of failure for tumour located in MISG was distant metastasis, whereas in MASG, loco-regional failure was commonly encountered. In terms of tumour grade, low-grade and high-grade had the best and worst outcomes for both MASG and MISG. However, survival curves for intermediate-grade tumours clustered with low-grade tumours in MASG and with high-grade tumours in MISG.

conclusionTumour location demonstrated a pronounced impact on MEC outcomes following treatment, independent of AJCC staging and histological grade.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, MucoepidermoidSalivary Gland NeoplasmsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultBrandwein-gradeMajor salivary glandMinor salivary glandMucoepidermoid carcinomaSalivary gland

Identifiers

PMID41680505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.