ReviewHead & neck2026
Integrating Immunotherapy Into Head and Neck Surgery: Bridging Tumor Biology to Perioperative Decision-Making, a Review.
Review in Head & neck, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo provide a comprehensive review of the biological rationale, clinical evidence, and practical perioperative management of immunotherapy for the head and neck surgeon. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Standard treatment for resectable head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) has reached a survival plateau, with over 50% of patients experiencing recurrence. The integration of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) into the neoadjuvant window represents a paradigm shift toward biologically adapted surgical intervention.
resultsNeoadjuvant immunotherapy capitalizes on an intact immune substrate to create an in situ vaccine, avoiding the post-surgical immune desert that limits adjuvant efficacy. Emerging phase III data confirm that perioperative ICI significantly improves event-free survival. Successful implementation requires the surgeon to navigate unique diagnostic challenges, such as distinguishing rare but anatomically risky pseudoprogression from true progression. While combination therapies (chemoimmunotherapy or immunoradiotherapy) yield higher pathologic complete response rates, they also increase toxicity. Intraoperatively, ICI monotherapy generally preserves tissue planes without increasing surgical delays or major wound complications. Standard biomarkers like PD-L1 and TMB, alongside emerging tools such as liquid biopsy (ctDNA), are essential for patient selection and dynamic monitoring.
conclusionsThe transition to neoadjuvant immunotherapy facilitates future surgical de-escalation and function-preserving approaches. To optimize outcomes, the modern surgeon must act as a surgical immunologist, interpreting translational data to guide real-time operative planning.
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.