A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

The superselective intra-arterial infusion of cisplatin and concomitant radiotherapy (RADPLAT) is effective for metastatic lymph nodes in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: Superselective intra-arterial infusion of cisplatin and concomitant radiotherapy (RADPLAT) is a very promising treatment modality for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. However, there are some concerns regarding its potential for the control of neck lymph node metastasis. The objective of this study was to investigate whether RADPLAT provided inferior regional control compared to intravenous chemoradiotherapy (IV-CRT).

Methods: A total of 172 patients with neck lymph node metastases, 66 of whom underwent RADPLAT and 106 IV-CRT, were enrolled in this study. We retrospectively compared regional control rates between RADPLAT and IV-CRT. Furthermore, to adjust for differences in factors related to patient background between the groups, we conducted inverse probability weighting (IPW) analysis using the propensity score.

Results: A comparison between the two groups revealed that the regional control rates were almost equal under unadjusted conditions; however, after adjustment by IPW analysis, the RADPLAT group had a relatively better regional control rate than did the IV-CRT group (1 year regional control rate: 86.6% vs. 79.4%). In addition, the analysis of relative risk factors for regional control in the RADPLAT group showed that the absence of intra-arterial cisplatin infusion into metastatic lymph nodes was the only independent risk factor (Hazard ratio: 4.23, p = 0.04).

Conclusion: This study showed that the regional control rate in patients treated with RADPLAT was noninferior to that for IV-CRT. Locally advanced head and neck cancers is a good indication for RADPLAT, even if the patients have neck lymph node metastases.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-023-02363-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

regional control
28
head neck
12
neck lymph
12
lymph node
12
control rate
12
radplat
9
superselective intra-arterial
8
intra-arterial infusion
8
infusion cisplatin
8
cisplatin concomitant
8

Similar Publications