ArticleIndian journal of surgical oncology2026
Comparison of Clinical and Pathological T Staging in Gingivobuccal Complex Cancers-A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Indian journal of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate staging of gingivobuccal complex (GBC) cancers is critical for treatment planning and prognosis. Discrepancies between clinical T staging (cT) and pathological T staging (pT) may lead to over or undertreatment. This study examines these discrepancies to highlight their implications. A retrospective observational study of 469 patients with GBC cancers was conducted at a tertiary care center. Patients underwent clinical staging based on imaging and physical examination and pathological staging following surgical resection. The agreement between cT and pT stages was analyzed using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Concordance between cT and pT stages was 32.08%. Upstaging (pT > cT) occurred in 13.4% of cases, primarily due to extra nodal extension or nodal metastases, while 51.4% of cases were downstaged, often from cT4b to pT4a. Discrepancies arose from misjudgements of tumor size, depth of invasion, and involvement of structures like the masticator space, infratemporal fossa, and bone. Significant discrepancies between cT and pT staging in GBC cancers underscore the limitations of preoperative assessments. Integrating advanced imaging and tagging structures intraoperatively could improve staging accuracy, optimize treatment decisions, and enhance outcomes.
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.