Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34071997›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Resection Margins in Head and Neck Cancer Surgery: An Update of Residual Disease and Field Cancerization.

Annouk S Pierik, C René Leemans, Ruud H Brakenhoff

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. What's behind Margin Status in Oral Cancer?Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Sensitive MRD Detection from Lymphatic Fluid after Surgery in HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Annouk S PierikAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Tumor Biology and Immunology Section, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C René LeemansAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Tumor Biology and Immunology Section, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7887-083X
Ruud H BrakenhoffAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Tumor Biology and Immunology Section, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgery is one of the mainstays of head and neck cancer treatment, and aims at radical resection of the tumor with 1 cm tumor-free margins to obtain locoregional control. Surgical margins are evaluated by histopathological examination of the resection specimen. It has been long an enigma that approximately 10-30% of surgically treated head and neck cancer patients develop locoregional recurrences even though the resection margins were microscopically tumor-free. However, the origins of these recurrences have been elucidated by a variety of molecular studies. Recurrences arise either from minimal residual disease, cancer cells in the surgical margins that escape detection by the pathologist when examining the specimen, or from precancerous mucosal changes that may remain unnoticed. Head and neck tumors develop in mucosal precursor changes that are sometimes visible but mostly not, fueling research into imaging modalities such as autofluorescence, to improve visualization. Mostly unnoticed, these precancerous changes may stay behind when the tumor is resected, and subsequent malignant progression will cause a local relapse. This led to a clinical trial of autofluorescence-guided surgery, of which the results were reported in 2020. This review focuses on the most recent literature of the improved diagnosis of the resection margins of surgically treated head and neck cancer patients, the pathobiological origin of recurrent disease, and relevant biomarkers to predict local relapse. Directions for further research will be discussed, including potential options for improved and personalized treatment, based on the most recently published data.

Indexed as

field cancerizationhead and neck squamous cell carcinomaleukoplakiamolecular diagnosisrecurrenceresidual diseasesecond primary tumor

Identifiers

PMID34071997
PMCPMC8198309
OpenAlexW3164572091

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.