SynthesisBMC oral health2026
Two-year follow-up outcomes of neoadjuvant therapy in oral squamous cell carcinoma: an exploratory systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesNeoadjuvant therapy has been increasingly explored as a treatment strategy for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and may be associated with favorable pathological responses. However, its long-term efficacy and safety have not yet been systematically evaluated. Therefore, this study aimed to comprehensively synthesize the available evidence regarding the clinical outcomes of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with OSCC.
methodsWe systematically searched three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) for relevant studies evaluating neoadjuvant therapy in OSCC. Eligible studies published up to June 1, 2025 were included. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled proportions of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Safety outcomes were assessed based on the incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Data extraction and quality assessment were independently performed by two reviewers in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.
resultsA total of ten studies involving 578 patients met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. The pooled DFS rates at 12 and 24 months were 68% and 41%, respectively. Correspondingly, the pooled OS rates were 83% at 12 months and 52% at 24 months. The pooled incidence of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events was 19%.
conclusionsNeoadjuvant therapy demonstrates encouraging efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in patients with OSCC. Nevertheless, further high-quality studies with longer follow-up periods are required to confirm these findings.
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.