To the Editor We commend Hutcheson et al1 on their interesting study; however, a few points need to be addressed.
This study, being a retrospective toxic effects analysis, has various problems, chief among which is the lack of a priori decided end points. Although a 6-month period seems to be clinically meaningful, the lack of an a priori decided effect size remains an issue. Furthermore, the general dictum in oncologic care is to expose the patient to only 1 form of definitive treatment modality if it is deemed adequate.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Sapru S, Nanda SS. Radical Radiotherapy Should Remain the Standard of Care for Carcinoma Oropharynx. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;146(5):504–505. doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2020.0089
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: