Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41324633›Full record

ReviewHNO2026

[Neoadjuvant concepts compared to adjuvant and perioperative strategies in the treatment of head and neck cancer].

Benedikt Schmidl, Barbara Wollenberg

Abstract readReviewComparative StudyEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Review in HNO, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

2 authors.

Benedikt SchmidlHNO-Klinik, TUM Universitätsklinikum, Ismaningerstraße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland. benedikt.schmidl@tum.de.
Barbara WollenbergHNO-Klinik, TUM Universitätsklinikum, Ismaningerstraße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the recent results of large phase III trials, immuno-oncological concepts are moving into the focus of curative treatment for locally advanced head and neck cancers. In particular, perioperative immunotherapy-i.e., the combination of neoadjuvant and adjuvant checkpoint inhibition-has emerged as a promising approach to improve event-free survival. This article presents current strategies of neoadjuvant therapy and systematically compares neoadjuvant with purely adjuvant immunotherapy in the curative setting of HNSCC. It contrasts the current data from the KEYNOTE-689 study (perioperative pembrolizumab) with those from the NIVOPOSTOP trial (adjuvant nivolumab), analyzing study designs and endpoints, as well as differences in risk definitions, distant metastasis rates, and surgical implications. In addition, the article discusses the potential roles of pathological response and microenvironment-dependent immune activation in therapeutic decision-making. The aim is to provide a current overview of which immuno-oncological strategies are presently available in the treatment of head and neck cancers and to highlight the key questions that need to be addressed in future studies.

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsImmunotherapyNeoadjuvant TherapyPerioperative CareAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedChemotherapy, AdjuvantEvidence-Based MedicineHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsTreatment OutcomeAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsCombined modality therapyImmunotherapyNeoadjuvant therapyOtorhinolaryngologic surgical proceduresTumor microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID41324633
PMCPMC12799755

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.