ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
De-escalating adjuvant therapy after pathologic complete response in oral squamous cell carcinoma: Chemoradiotherapy benefits only high-risk subgroups.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal adjuvant therapy for oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) patients achieving pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NAIC) remains uncertain. While radiotherapy (RT) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) improve locoregional control, their comparative efficacy and toxicity profiles in this setting are poorly defined. Methods: Oral SCC patients with pCR post-NAIC were retrospectively enrolled and stratified into RT and CRT groups. Propensity score matching balanced baseline characteristics. Outcomes included 3-year locoregional control (LRC), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Subgroup analyses evaluated treatment effects by radiologic extranodal extension (rENE) and tumor differentiation. Results: Among 116 patients analyzed (84 matched), CRT showed no significant LRC or OS benefit over RT alone in the overall cohort (LRC: HR 1.89, 95% CI 0.26-4.72, p=0.625; OS: HR 1.45, 95% CI 0.62-3.41, p=0.392). However, subgroup analyses revealed CRT improved outcomes in high-risk patients (rENE+ or poorly differentiated tumors), reducing recurrence by 50% (rENE+: HR 3.12, 95% CI 1.13-8.60, p=0.028; poor differentiation: HR 3.45, 95% CI 1.23-9.68, p=0.019) and enhancing 3-year OS (rENE+: 62.4% Conclusion: CRT should be reserved for high-risk pCR patients (rENE+ or poorly differentiated tumors), while RT alone suffices for low-risk cases. This risk-adapted approach optimizes outcomes while minimizing toxicity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.