ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Target-prioritized IMRT for nasopharyngeal carcinoma with tumor proximity to the spinal cord: clinical feasibility and long-term outcomes.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: For locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) with tumor close to the cervical spinal cord, strict spinal cord constraints may compromise target coverage. We evaluated the feasibility and safety of a target-prioritized IMRT strategy in this setting. Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 909 consecutive patients with stage III-IVB NPC treated with IMRT between 2012 and 2022. Among 145 patients with tumour-cord proximity, 106 (73.1%) received a target-prioritized strategy, when adequate target coverage could not be achieved under conventional constraints. Dosimetric parameters were extracted from dose-volume histograms. Predictors were evaluated by logistic regression and a cumulative cranio-cervical burden score. Outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test. Results: With a median follow-up of 76.11 months, no clinically diagnosed radiation myelopathy (RM) was observed in the overall cohort (upper one-sided 95% CI, 0.33%). The 5-year local relapse-free survival (LRFS) and overall survival (OS) were 92.8% and 86.8%. The cumulative burden score, based on occipital base, occipital condyle, and atlanto-dental interval involvement, was associated with target-prioritized planning (trend OR, 1.906; P = 0.001). In the target-prioritized cohort, median cord Dmax was 56.2 Gy, and 22 patients (20.8%) had a Dmax >60 Gy, while high-dose volumes remained limited. With a median follow-up of 93.24 months in this cohort, 5-year LRFS and OS rates were 87.9% and 74.2%, respectively, and no clinically diagnosed RM was observed (upper one-sided 95% CI, 2.8%). Conclusion: With strict dose-volume control and image guidance, target-prioritized strategy appears feasible in selected NPC cases but does not support modification of current spinal cord constraints.
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.