ArticleOncology letters2026
Optimizing safety and efficacy in radiotherapy for external auditory canal cancer.
Article in Oncology letters, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
External auditory canal cancer (EACC) is a rare and aggressive malignancy with no established standard treatment. The present study aimed to investigate the efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) for EACC. The data of 42 patients with EACC treated between January 2000 and August 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 10 (24%) patients underwent surgery followed by RT (median dose, 60 Gy), whereas 32 (76%) underwent definitive RT (median dose, 66 Gy) and a total of 23 (72%) patients received concurrent chemotherapy with definitive RT. Overall survival (OS), local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity were examined. The median age of patients was 65 years, and the median follow-up duration was 31.5 months (range: 6-120 months). In all patients, the 3-year OS, LC and PFS rates were 54.8, 65.5 and 49.0%, respectively. The 3-year OS, LC and PFS rates in patients who underwent surgery followed by RT, and those who underwent definitive RT were 90% vs. 42.9% (P=0.008), 100% vs. 53.9% (P=0.01) and 90% vs. 35.9% (P=0.003), respectively. No local recurrence occurred among those who underwent surgery followed by RT, although 50% of these patients had positive or close surgical margins. Grade ≥3 brain toxicities were observed in 3 (7.1%) patients, all of whom had T4 disease and underwent definitive RT with concurrent systemic chemotherapy. In conclusion, compared with definitive RT, surgery followed by RT was associated with favorable outcomes in patients with EACC. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial for optimizing treatment outcomes, especially for patients in the advanced stages of EACC.
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.