000277796 001__ 277796
000277796 005__ 20240229155024.0
000277796 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.7150/jca.84854
000277796 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:37497418
000277796 0247_ $$2pmc$$apmc:PMC10367925
000277796 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:152034020
000277796 037__ $$aDKFZ-2023-01507
000277796 041__ $$aEnglish
000277796 082__ $$a610
000277796 1001_ $$aFu, Yue-Chun$$b0
000277796 245__ $$aPrognostic Value of Lymph Node Necrosis at Different N Stages in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.
000277796 260__ $$aWyoming, NSW$$bIvyspring Internat. Publ.$$c2023
000277796 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000277796 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000277796 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1690534725_11048
000277796 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000277796 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000277796 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000277796 520__ $$aBackground: Lymph node necrosis (LNN), including retropharyngeal nodal necrosis and cervical nodal necrosis, which is related to radiotherapy/ chemotherapy resistance, is a common phenomenon in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). This study was to assess the prognostic value of LNN at different N stages in NPC patients. Materials and Methods: In total, 1,665 newly diagnosed NPC patients at stage TxN1-3M0 from two centers were enrolled. Univariate and multivariate models were constructed to assess the association between LNN and long-term survival outcomes. The propensity score matching method was performed to balance treatment groups for baseline characteristics. Results: Of the 1,665, 540 patients (540/1665, 32.4%) were diagnosed with LNN, of which 54.1% (292/540) patients were at stage N1, 31.3% (169/540) at stage N2, and 14.6% (79/540) at stage N3. Univariate and multivariate analyses indicated LNN as an independent predictor for progression‑free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS) in stage N1-3 patients (all P<0.001). When patients were analyzed according to stage, similar findings were observed for N1 patients (all P<0.001); for N2 patients, LNN independently predicted PFS (P=0.003), OS (P=0.011), and DMFS (P=0.004), and for stage N3, LNN only independently predicted LRRFS (P=0.019). 123 pairs of patients who received induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy or only concurrent chemoradiotherapy were matched, adding induction chemotherapy improved 5-year OS, PFS and LRFFS, but the results were not statistically significant. Conclusions: In NPC patients, LNN could independently predict poor prognosis at all N1-3 stages and at each N stage (N1 to N3). The value of adding induction chemotherapy to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with LNN still requires further prospective studies.
000277796 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$a315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)$$cPOF4-315$$fPOF IV$$x0
000277796 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, , Journals: inrepo02.dkfz.de
000277796 650_7 $$2Other$$ainduction chemotherapy
000277796 650_7 $$2Other$$alymph node necrosis
000277796 650_7 $$2Other$$anasopharyngeal carcinoma
000277796 650_7 $$2Other$$aprognosis
000277796 650_7 $$2Other$$astage N1-3
000277796 7001_ $$aLiang, Shao-Bo$$b1
000277796 7001_ $$aHuang, Wen-Jie$$b2
000277796 7001_ $$aChen, Lu-Si$$b3
000277796 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)fd121de04c905dac052d05d2f84f9754$$aChen, Dan-Ming$$b4$$udkfz
000277796 7001_ $$aLiu, Li-Zhi$$b5
000277796 7001_ $$aLuo, Min$$b6
000277796 7001_ $$aZhong, Xiao-Fen$$b7
000277796 7001_ $$aXu, Xiang-Ying$$b8
000277796 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2573318-7$$a10.7150/jca.84854$$gVol. 14, no. 11, p. 2085 - 2092$$n11$$p2085 - 2092$$tJournal of cancer$$v14$$x1837-9664$$y2023
000277796 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:277796$$pVDB
000277796 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)fd121de04c905dac052d05d2f84f9754$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b4$$kDKFZ
000277796 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vBildgebung und Radioonkologie$$x0
000277796 9141_ $$y2023
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2018-07-27T12:14:26Z
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2018-07-27T12:14:26Z
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Peer review$$d2018-07-27T12:14:26Z
000277796 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNCNV$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC (No Version)$$bDOAJ$$d2018-07-27T12:14:26Z
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0113$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded$$d2022-11-25
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEssential Science Indicators$$d2022-11-25
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$d2022-11-25
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0700$$2StatID$$aFees$$d2022-11-25
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bJ CANCER : 2022$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0320$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bPubMed Central$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0600$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEbsco Academic Search$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bASC$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2023-10-26
000277796 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5$$d2023-10-26
000277796 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E055-20160331$$kE055$$lE055 KKE Molekulare Radioonkologie$$x0
000277796 980__ $$ajournal
000277796 980__ $$aVDB
000277796 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)E055-20160331
000277796 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED