Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 300

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patterns of regional lymph node metastasis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A meta-analysis of clinical evidence

Open access
Ho, Francis CH, Tham, Ivan WK, Earnest, Arul, Lee, Khai Mun, Lu, Jiade J·2012·BMC Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The characteristics of cervical lymphatic metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are not completely understood. As such, radiotherapy to the entire lymphatic of the neck bilaterally has been empirically practiced even in early stage disease, although not supported by clinical evidence. We studied the pattern and probability of nodal metastasis through a meta-analysis of published evidences, with an aim to establish an evidence-based guideline for selecting and delineation of clinical target volume of neck lymphatics for conformation radiation for NPC. METHODS: A literature search yielded an initial 411 original articles, and 13 studies with 2920 NPC cases staged via MRI were included in this analysis. The occurrence of nodal metastasis was calculated and analyzed according to the respective regional nodal levels. RESULTS: 85% of NPC cases presented with lymphadenopathy. The most commonly involved regions include retropharyngeal (69%) and level II lymph nodes (70%). The overall probability of levels III, IV, and V nodal involvement are 45%, 11%, and 27%, respectively. Low-risk node groups included the supraclavicular, levels IA/IB and VI nodes, and parotid nodes with involvement rates at 3%, 0%, 3%, 0%, and 1%, respectively. Nodal metastases followed an orderly pattern and the probability of "skip" metastasis between levels varied between 0.5-7.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node metastasis in NPC follows a predictable and orderly pattern. The rarity of metastasis in certain nodal groups and "skip" metastasis suggest that reduced treatment volume is feasible in conformal radiotherapy for NPC.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1471-2407-12-98

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Cited by

See all 300

Metadata

Authors
Ho, F. C., Tham, I. W., Earnest, A., Lee, K. M., & Lu, J. J.
Venue
BMC Cancer
Published
2012-03-21
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
98-98
ISSN
1471-2407 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2070592678
Cited by
300
References
10
FWCI
3.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patterns of regional lymph node metastasis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A meta-analysis of clinical evidence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2407-12-98
The paper
Ho, F. C., Tham, I. W., Earnest, A., Lee, K. M., & Lu, J. J. (2012). Patterns of regional lymph node metastasis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A meta-analysis of clinical evidence. BMC Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-12-98

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.