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
The clinical outcomes and overall survival in patients with mucoepidermoid and adenoid cystic carcinoma of the salivary glands: A comparative analysis of long-term outcomes.
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.
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
purposeMucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) and adenoid cystic carcinoma (AdCC) are the two most common salivary gland malignancies, but differ substantially in biological behavior, recurrence patterns and long-term prognosis. Comparative data from patients treated within the same institution using similar management strategies remain limited. This study compared long-term survival, recurrence patterns and prognostic factors between MEC and AdCC to identify histology-specific characteristics that may inform follow-up and treatment strategies.
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of patients treated for MEC or AdCC at a tertiary academic center between 1996 and 2022. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence patterns, analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox regression.
resultsSixty-two patients (31 AdCC, 31 MEC) were included. Although 5-year OS was identical (81%), AdCC had significantly poorer DFS (53% vs. 80%, p = 0.015) and higher recurrence rates (18/31 vs. 8/31, p = 0.020), and more distant metastases (18/31 vs. 1/31 patients, p = 0.0016). High tumor grade, defined according to tumor-specific pathological criteria, was the strongest independent predictor of poor outcomes (OS: HR = 19.72, p < 0.001; DFS: HR = 3.99, p = 0.01). Advanced T stage, nodal involvement, and metastatic disease independently predicted worse OS. Seven of 11 patients with locoregional recurrence developed a second recurrence, predominantly in AdCC. Curative-intent salvage therapy did not improve OS.
conclusionsTumor grade is the strongest prognostic determinant, surpassing histologic subtype. AdCC demonstrates more aggressive biology with higher recurrence rates and poorer DFS despite similar OS. The limited survival benefit of salvage therapy highlights the need for grade-adapted management and more effective therapies for high-grade disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867661What 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.